Franklin Savings Institution v. Central Mutual Fire Insurance
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, J.
The policy of insurance, upon which this suit is brought, contains the provision that “ if the assured shall vacate the property in whole or in part, this policy shall be void; this company will not insure unoccupied property.” It appears by the agreed statement of facts that the premises were vacated by the occupant before the fire and remained unoccupied up to the time of the fire. It is clear, therefore, that the policy was void as to Kelliher, the original assured, and that he could not maintain an action upon it. Harrison v. City Ins. Co. 9 Allen, 231. Keith v. Quincy Mutual Ins. Co. 10…
2Cited by32 opinions
- Weems v. American SEC. Ins. Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1986
- Palmer Savings Bank v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
- Delaware Ins. v. GreerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1903
- Walker v. Queen Insurance Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1926
- Chandos v. American Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1893
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.