Schmaelzle v. London & Lancashire Fire Insurance
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action in the nature of interpleader to determine what part or proportion of a fire insurance loss each of the defendants should equitably pay, brought to the Superior Court in New Haven County and reserved by that court, Thayer, J., upon an agreed statement of facts, for the consideration and advice of this court. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtPrentice, J.
The plaintiff is the owner of premises upon which stood a brewery and shed. In the brewery were ma chinery and stock. Upon the buildings, machinery, and stock, the plaintiff carried, in some thirty-four companies, insurance against fire aggregating $60,000 in amount. These policies were all of the standard form and contained the following provision: “ This company shall not be liable under this policy for a greater proportion of any loss on the described property . . . than the amount hereby insured shall bear to the whole insurance, whether valid or not, or by solvent or insolvent insurers,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lesure Lumber Co. v. Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1897
- Ogden v. . East River Insurance Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Sherman v. Madison Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875
- Chandler v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaSupreme Court of Vermont · 1898
3Cited by13 opinions
- Wilson Company v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1923
- Grollimund v. Germania Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1912
- Scottish Union & National Ins. v. Moore Mill & Gin Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
- Dolan Mercantile Co. v. Wholesale Grocery SubscribersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1930
- Carlton Lumber Co. v. Lumber Ins.Oregon Supreme Court · 1916
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.