West v. Springfield Fire & Marine Insurance

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Dawson, J.:

This was an action on a fire insurance policy. The plaintiff, whose farming equipment was insured by defendant, sustained a loss by fire. Defendant admitted the loss and conceded its liability, but contended that one chattel — a corn shredding machine — was excluded from the insurance by the terms of the policy. The pertinent clause of the policy, reciting what the policy did and did'not cover, reads:

“(14) $500.00 On harness, saddles, robes, blankets, whips, carriages, buggies, sleighs, wagons, including hay racks, and all other farm…