Lycoming Insurance v. Schreffler
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Schuylkill county. This was an action of covenant, brought to September Term 1858, by Godfrey Schreffler against The Lycoming Mutual Insurance Company, on a policy of insurance, dated October 3d 1854, given by defendants to George H. Potts, upon a stock of merchandise in a store at Brockville, Pa., valued at §>3000, and which, on the 11th of September 1855 ivas, with the written consent of the -company, duly assigned to the plaintiff, who averred…
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Schuylkill county. This was an action of covenant, brought to September Term 1858, by Godfrey Schreffler against The Lycoming Mutual Insurance Company, on a policy of insurance, dated October 3d 1854, given by defendants to George H. Potts, upon a stock of merchandise in a store at Brockville, Pa., valued at §>3000, and which, on the 11th of September 1855 ivas, with the written consent of the -company, duly assigned to the plaintiff, who averred a loss by fire on the 13th of April 1858, exceeding the amount insured. To a declaration in the usual form, the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered, March 22d 1862, by
Thompson, J.
In The Commonwealth Insurance Company v. Sennett, Barr & Co., 5 Wright 100, we held it to be error to receive as evidence to go to the jury, the statement of the loss, made out by the insured under oath, pursuant to the required stipulation also to be found attached to this policy. It can never be evidence of the subject or amount of the loss sustained. Had this decision been known, the error in receiving the plaintiff’s statement as evidence generally, would undoubtedly have been avoided. The fact that it was called for,…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Peoples M. Accident Ass'n v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
- Ward v. Babbitt, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- Eberly v. Springfield Fire & Marine InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912