M. Arnfeld & Son v. Guardian Assurance Co. of London
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 95, Oct. T., 1895, by defendants, from judgment of C. P. No. 2, Allegheny County, Oct. T., 1895, No. 653, on verdict for plaintiffs. Assumpsit on a policy of fire insurance. Before Ewing, P. J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court. Verdict and judgment for plaintiffs for $2,679.25. Defendants appealed. Error assigned among others, was answer to defendants’ second point, quoted in the opinion of the Supreme Court.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Dean,
On the 29th of March, 1893, the defendants, through one Charles Zugschmidt, an insurance broker, issued to plaintiffs a policy of insurance against fire in the sum of $2,500 on a stock of clothing in their store in Pittsburg; the term of the insurance was one year. The policy further contained this stipulation, — that it should be canceled “ at any time at the request of the insured, or by the company, by giving five days notice of such cancellation. If this policy shall be cancelled as herein provided, or become void or cease, the premium having been actually paid,…
2Cited by27 opinions
- MFA Mutual Insurance Co. v. Southwest Baptist College, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1964
- Phœnix Insurance v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Hamm Realty Co. v. New Hampshire Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- Scheel v. German-American InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Waterloo Lumber Co. v. Des Moines InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1912
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.