Brown v. Vermont Mutual Fire Insurance
Supreme Court of Vermont
Contract upon a fire insurance policy. .Answer, the general issue, with notice of special matter in defence; among other things, that plaintiff had not furnished defendant with an amended proof of loss within thirty days after notice that the proof already furnished was defective, and that therefore the policy was void. Trial by jury at the September Term, 1916, Rutland County, Butler, J., presiding. Verdict for plaintiff. Defendant excepted. The opinion states the case.
1Opinion of the CourtMiles, J.
This is an action of contract with a count in general assumpsit, on a fire insurance policy. The exceptions relied upon by the defendant in its brief, are to the admission of evidence, to a certain portion of the charge of the court and to the court’s refusal to direct a verdict for the defendant. The plaintiff challenges the sufficiency of the defendant’s exceptions, upon the ground that it does not appear in the exceptions nor in the transcript, that any judgment was rendered in the case or exception taken to it, and an examination of the exceptions and the transcript shows the fact to be…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Brown v. AitkenSupreme Court of Vermont · 1916
- Citizens' Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. Fitchburg Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1912
- Fitzsimons v. Richardson, Twigg & Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1912
- Manley v. Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1896
- Estabrooks v. Fidelity Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1902
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Platt v. ShieldsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1923
- State v. BarnettSupreme Court of Vermont · 1939
- State v. LapanSupreme Court of Vermont · 1928
- Shields v. Vermont Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1929
- State v. GosselinSupreme Court of Vermont · 1939
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.