Dein-Bacher, Inc. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
Supreme Court of New Jersey
1Per curiam
We agree with the vice-chancellor that the evidence clearly indicates that it was the intention of all parties to issue a policy of insurance that would cover the loss sustained by the complainant; that the policy which actually was issued was the result of mutual mistake; and that the complainant is entitled to have it reformed.
There is another question raised in the court below and urged here which is not dealt with at length in the opinion of the vice-chancellor. The appellant contends that the respondent had the policy in its possession from the time of issuance until the time of the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Kook v. American Sur. Co. of NYNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1965
- Volker v. the Conn. Fire Ins. Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1952
- Millhurst Milling & Drying Co. v. Automobile Ins. Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1954
- Parrette v. Citizens' Casualty Co. of N.Y.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1940
- Hinchliffe v. KastnerNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1948