Smaldone v. President of the Insurance Co. of North America
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered December 10, 1891, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and an order denying a motion for a new trial. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The furnishing of proofs of loss, as required by this policy, was a condition precedent to plaintiff’s right of recovery. (Titus v. G. F. Ins.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered December 10, 1891, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and an order denying a motion for a new trial. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The furnishing of proofs of loss, as required by this policy, was a condition precedent to plaintiff’s right of recovery. (Titus v. G. F. Ins. Co., 81 N. Y. 411; Blossom v. L. F. Ins. Co., 64 N. Y. 162; Quinlan v. P. W. Ins. Co., 133 N. Y. 356.) Under the limited and…
1Opinion of the CourtCullen, J.
The action is brought on a standard fire insurance policy, and the only question raised on this appeal is as to the power of an agent sent by the defendant to adjust the loss to waive the provision of the policy requiring the service of proofs of loss. This agent was not only authorized to adjust the amount of the loss, but, as appears by his own testimony, was empowered to negotiate any settlement of the claim of the insured on the policy and to pay and discharge such claim. Shortly after the occurrence of the fire, and before the expiration of the time within which it was necessary to serve…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hicks v. British America Assurance Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Bishop v. Agricultural InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Sergent v. Liverpool & London & Globe InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
3Cited by8 opinions
- Simmons v. HanneSupreme Court of Florida · 1905
- Drennan Ex Rel. Drennan v. Sun Indemnity Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1936
- Viles v. Prudential Ins.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1938
- Reese v. SchneiderNew York Supreme Court · 1960
- Strouse v. Union Indemnity Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.