Harris v. Ohio Insurance
Ohio Supreme Court
Covenant ou a policy oí insurance on dry goods against fire for five months from August, 1829. Plea, that the plaintiff effected another insurance on the same interest, and gave no notice to the defendants.
Read the full summary
Covenant ou a policy oí insurance on dry goods against fire for five months from August, 1829. Plea, that the plaintiff effected another insurance on the same interest, and gave no notice to the defendants. The sixth clause of the policy is, “That persons insuring property at this office must give notice of any other insurance made on their behalf on the same, and cause such other insurance to be endorsed on the policy: in which case each office shall be liable to the payment of a rateable proportion of any loss or damage which may be sustained. And unless such notice is given, the insured…
1Opinion of the CourtLane, J.
The plaintiffs are liable for costs, and incompetent to testify. The interest cannot be released by any one pursuing the interest.
LANE, J. to the jury. The policy of insurance is the contract of the parties. They had a right to settle its terms, and they have agreed that if any other insurance is effected on the goods, the insured shall give notice to the defendants, or otherwise not call on them to pay. It is incumbent on the plaintiffs to prove to your satisfaction that they gave the defendants notice of the other insurances, there being no dispute but other insurances were effected; if the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Garrett v. ClarkOregon Supreme Court · 1875