Robinson v. Commonwealth Ins.
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
This was an action on a policy of insurance, dated on the 16th of January, 1837, whereby the company insured for the plaintiff, “one thousand dollars, on property on board the schooner Pantaloon, at and from Portsmouth to Baltimore, also four hundred dollars more, at the same risk, for the assured,” at one per cent, premium.
Read the full summary
This was an action on a policy of insurance, dated on the 16th of January, 1837, whereby the company insured for the plaintiff, “one thousand dollars, on property on board the schooner Pantaloon, at and from Portsmouth to Baltimore, also four hundred dollars more, at the same risk, for the assured,” at one per cent, premium. The policy contained the usual clause in Boston policies, that “the insurers shall not be liable for any partial loss, on hemp, flax, &c, &c.; nor for any partial loss, on salt, grain, fish, fruit, hides, skins, or other goods, that are esteemed perishable in their own…
1Opinion of the CourtStory, Circuit Justice
(charging jury). The principle of law is very clear, that, as this is an insurance on a perishable cargo, the plaintiff is not entitled to recover, unless there has been a total loss of the cargo by some peril insured against. If the schooner had arrived at the port of destination, with the cargo on board, physically in existence, the plaintiff *1004would not have been entitled to recover, however great the damage might have been by a peril insured against, even if it had been 99 per cent., or in truth even if the cargo had there been of no real value. This seems to be the result of the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Faulkner v. . HartNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Amok Gold Mining Co. v. Canton Insurance OfficeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918