Legal Opinion · Dissent
Zuraff v. Empire Fire & Marine Insurance Co.
North Dakota Supreme Court
Decided April 5, 1977No. Civ. 9276Published
1DissentVogel, Justice
I dissent. The judgment below is correct, and should be affirmed.
The dispute in this case is over the interpretation of Section 26-18-08, N.D.C.C. It provides that the stated amount of the insurance written in a fire-insurance policy shall be taken conclusively to be the true value of the property insured when the insured property “shall be destroyed by fire without fraud on the part of the insured or his assigns, . . .”
As I read this statute and the relevant case law, only fraud subsequent to the issuance of the policy can be a defense.
I do not read the North Dakota cases, Horswill v. North…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Nathan v. St. Paul Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
- Gamel v. Continental Insurance CompanyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1971
- Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Company v. Stanley C. Edmister and Dorothy Mae EdmisterCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1969
- Horswill v. North Dakota Mutual Fire InsuranceNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1920
- National Farmers Union Property & Casualty Co. v. MichaelsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1961
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.