Legal Opinion
Stevens v. Mutual Protection Fire Insurance
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided March 4, 1930PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSnow, J.
The policies insured the plaintiff’s dwelling, and attached stable. The actions are for fire damages to the latter.
It appears to be conceded that the fire originated from a Newtown kerosene oil brooder which, subsequent to the date of the policy and without the knowledge or permission of the companies, had been installed by the plaintiff in the second story or open chamber of the stable, where it had been in operation for about seven weeks. The chamber had a floor space of 24 feet by 28 feet and a post of 5 feet, and was open to the roof. Some years before it had been used as a hayloft. The…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Empire State Cattle Co. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Williams v. VreelandSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Thompson v. . SimpsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. MulkeySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Farmers' Nat. Bank of Tecumseh v. McCallSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Parker v. James Granger, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1935
- L & R Realty v. Connecticut National BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- Krupa v. Farmington River Power Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1959
- Danvers Savings Bank v. HammerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1982
- Doughty v. GrillsCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1952
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.