Bowen v. Hope Insurance
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
It was agreed by the parties, that these two actions should be decided by the Court, upon the following statement of facts. The actions were on two policies of insurance effected by a part owner of the brig Governor Brooks.
Read the full summary
It was agreed by the parties, that these two actions should be decided by the Court, upon the following statement of facts. The actions were on two policies of insurance effected by a part owner of the brig Governor Brooks. By the first policy, which was dated October 15, 1834, the plaintiff’s intestate was insured at the office of the Hope Insurance Company, to the amount of $5000 on the brig, at and from Boston to and at all ports and places to which she might proceed, for one year from the sixth day of October 1834, at noon ; and if the ressel should be at sea when the year expired, then…
1Opinion of the Court
Shaw C. J.
delivered the opinion of the Court. The policy in the first of these cases was on time, for one year, and if the vessel should be at sea when the year expired, then the risk was to continue until her arrival in port, at a pro rata premium. The loss occurred after the expiration of the year, and the question is, whether the risk continued, upon the contingency stated, within the meaning of the policy. The term at sea may have different meanings, according to the connexion in which it is used. Here it is used in contradistinction to arrival in port. If the vessel has sailed or…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wood v. New England Marine InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1817
3Cited by4 opinions
- Powers v. HarrisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
- Wilson v. Manhattan Canning Co.District Court, W.D. Washington · 1914
- Smith v. Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
- Ex parte O'HareCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1910