Liebenstein v. Ætna Insurance

This case is in all respects identical with that of Liebenstein v. The Baltic Insurance Company, ante, p. 301, and Same v. The Metropolitan Insurance Company of New York, post, p. 305, to which we refer for a statement of the facts, except, that the property insured, instead of being described as contained in the factory of appellant, as in those cases, was described as “ contained in the two story frame building occupied by the assured as a chair manufactory, situated on the north side of Superior street,” etc. We had no hesitation in holding, in those cases, that the term “ factory ”…