Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Sleeper v. N. H. F. Insurance

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided March 20, 1876Published

From Merrimack Circuit Court. Assumpsit, upon a policy of insurance. The action was sent to a referee, who, at the April term, 1875, made his report as follows : The property insured was situated in New Hampton.

Read the full summary

From Merrimack Circuit Court. Assumpsit, upon a policy of insurance. The action was sent to a referee, who, at the April term, 1875, made his report as follows : The property insured was situated in New Hampton. The plaintiff applied in Franklin to the defendants’ agent; and, upon the representation of the plaintiff, the agent, who had no knowledge of the property except what the plaintiff told him, issued a policy, a copy of which is hereto annexed, and received six dollars for the premium thereon. The plaintiff claimed at the trial that, in the absence of fraud, the valuation agreed upon by…

1Concurrence

It seems to me the specific facts reported by the referee, as to the removal of Colfas from the house insured, fully sustain the general finding, that, from the time he left, the premises were vacated within the meaning of the policy. I think, when the occupant of a dwelling-house moves out with his family, taking part of his furniture and all the wearing apparel of the family, and makes his place of abode in another town, although he may have an intention of returning in eight or ten months, such dwelling-house, while thus deserted, must be regarded as unoccupied — that is, vacated —…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Chamberlain v. N. H. Fire Ins.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1875

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API