Meriwether v. Phenix Insurance
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — Now. Thomas J. Seehorn, Judge. (1) The only question in the case is, did the insurance policy sued upon, insure the property which was destroyed. (2) The defendant knew of the character of the business conducted by the insured and its surroundings, also the kind of power with'which the plant was operated and where and by what the power was generated.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — Now. Thomas J. Seehorn, Judge. (1) The only question in the case is, did the insurance policy sued upon, insure the property which was destroyed. (2) The defendant knew of the character of the business conducted by the insured and its surroundings, also the kind of power with'which the plant was operated and where and by what the power was generated. Joyce on Insurance, sec. 497; Rissler v. Insurance Co., 150 Mo. 836; Williams v. Insurance Co., 73 Mo. App. 607; May on Insurance, sec. 420; I. W. L. & Z. Co. v. Insurance Co., 27 Mo. App. 446; Hale v.…
1Opinion of the CourtBroaddus, P. J.
— This is a suit to recover on a fire insurance policy. • The defendant recovered and plaintiff appealed. The defendant denies that the property, which was destroyed by fire, was included in the policy on which plaintiff seeks to recover. The property insured is described as follows:
“By this policy of insurance . . . does insure against all direct loss or damage by fire . . . the following property while located and contained as described herein, and not elsewhere, to-wit:
TWELVE THOUSAND, FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS.
$3,000. On frame and corrugated iron building and additions attached thereto,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- American Insurance v. NeibergerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881
3Cited by3 opinions
- Gregg v. GreggMissouri Court of Appeals · 1954
- Peony Park, Inc. v. Security InsuranceNebraska Supreme Court · 1940
- Rush v. RushMissouri Court of Appeals · 1955