London & Lancashire Fire Insurance v. Lycoming Fire Insurance
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Lycoming county: Of July Term, 1883, No. 216. Tliis was an action of covenant, by the Lycoming Fire Insurance Company against the Loudon and Lancashire Fire Insurance Company, to recover for a loss sustained by the plaintiff on a policy of insurance issued by them to one Thomas Helm, which risk it was claimed by the plaintiff was ro-insured to them by the defendant.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Lycoming county: Of July Term, 1883, No. 216. Tliis was an action of covenant, by the Lycoming Fire Insurance Company against the Loudon and Lancashire Fire Insurance Company, to recover for a loss sustained by the plaintiff on a policy of insurance issued by them to one Thomas Helm, which risk it was claimed by the plaintiff was ro-insured to them by the defendant. Pleas, non inf re-git conventiones, covenants performed, with leave, etc. By agreement of the partios, trial by jury was waived, and the cause submitted to the court (Cummin, P. J.,) under the…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Trunkey
The learned judge of the Common Pleas rightly ruled, “That there is no sufficient and competent evidence to vary, add to, or contradict the terms of either the contract of March 2,1880, or the policy of re-insurance sued upon.” That was consistent with the plaintiff’s (defendant in error) fifth legal proposition, for while parol evidence is admissible to change the terms of a written contract, that adduced may be insufficient. Then the contract between the parties must be construed by the court, uninfluenced by the conflicting statements of the only two witnesses examined, respecting their…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Prudential Casualty Co. v. KerrSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
- Downing v. Erie School DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Reck v. Hatboro Mutual Live Stock & Protective Ins.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894