Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. Paris Mutual Fire Insurance Co.

The appellant claims that (1) the policy was void for want of consideration and (2) because of the operation of the still; the rider was void because (3) without consideration and (4) because not signed by the president and secretary of the company; (5) the secretary of the insurer had no authority to waive the defense resulting from installation of the still; and (6) the court should have sus*67tained a demurrer to the complaint because it does not state a cause of action.(1) The claim of want of consideration for the policy is based on the fact that the bond for payment of assessments was not…