Litch v. North British & Mercantile Insurance
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract upon a policy of insurance against loss by fire, issued to the plaintiffs by the defendant corporation. Trial in the Superior Court, before Staples, J., who ruled that the plaintiffs could not maintain their action, and directed a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiffs alleged exceptions. The facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, C. J.
By the policy in suit, the defendant insured the plaintiffs “ on their one and one half story frame dwelling-house,” situate in Hyde Park. The policy contained the condition that it should become void “ if the above-mentioned premises shall at any time be occupied or used so as to increase the risk, or become vacant or unoccupied, and so remain, without notice to and consent of this company in writing.” The house was burned on April 8, 1881. It appeared by the undisputed evidence at the trial, that it was vacant and unoccupied from January 1, 1881, until it was destroyed by fire, without…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Ashworth v. Builders' Mutual Fire InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
3Cited by6 opinions
- Feshe v. Council Bluffs InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1888
- Mauck v. Northwestern National InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- Stensgaard v. National Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
- Wheeler v. Phœnix InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1893
- Barry v. Prescott InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1885
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.