Legal Opinion

Lawrence v. Schaefer

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1897PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Action on a’Lloyds policy.

1Opinion of the CourtSpbiNg, J.

This action was tried without a jury, and involves the question of the right of the insured in a Lloyds policy to sue each of the underwriters to recover for a loss within the terms *240of the policy.' The policy in suit was issued by twenty-five underwriters, and is signed, not by them personally, but by C. Hagen, their attorney. By the terms of the policy, the personal liability of each underwriter is limited to $200 in the event of loss, and-is individual and several. Then occur the following clauses, which comprise the nub of the controversy.in this action: “Ho action shall be brought to…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Matter of of N.Y., L. W.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1885
  2. Mead v. . MitchellNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
  3. Knorr v. BatesNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1895
  4. Leiter v. BeecherAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
  5. Knorr v. BatesNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1895

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Kaufman v. BoismierSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
  2. Compton v. BeecherAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
  3. Playman v. Commercial UnderwritersOregon Supreme Court · 1916

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API