Liverpool & London & Globe Insurance v. Stuart

I think the judgment of the trial court should be reversed, under the facts and the law applicable to this case. This was so held by the Supreme Court in 191 Ga. 745 (supra), in answer to a certified question from this court, and it ivas said that “a breach of this provision as to part of the personal property insured avoided the whole policy, and there could be no recovery for the destruction of the other personal property as to which the insured was sole and unconditional owner.” The policy provided: “This entire policy shall be void, unless otherwise provided by agreement in writing added…