Legal Opinion
Smith v. Switzerland General Insurance Co. of Zurich
City of New York Municipal Court
Decided February 16, 1933PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the CourtEvans, J.
If, under the facts at bar, the “ sue and labor ” clause may be construed to mean that suit is required to be brought against the carrier for damage to the cargo, as a condition precedent to the insurer’s liability under the policy, then the verdict is right. All that the “ sue and labor ” clause means, we are now told by defendant, is that the insurer must take every measure necessary for the “ preservation and recovery of the property.” (Alexandre v. Sun Mutual Ins. Co., 51 N. Y. 253; Richards Ins. [4th ed. 1932] 827; 5 Couch Ins. § 1226.) It is urged that the action for damages (See 147…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Washtenaw Mutual Fire Insurance v. BuddMichigan Supreme Court · 1919
- Shawnee Fire Insurance v. CosgroveSupreme Court of Kansas · 1912
- Svea Assurance Co. v. PackhamCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1901
- Sun Insurance Office v. HohensteinCity of New York Municipal Court · 1927
- Pentz v. Receivers of the Ætna Fire InsuranceNew York Court of Chancery · 1842
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.