Legal Opinion

Young v. Ohio Farmers' Insurance

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 10, 1892PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Error to Lake. (Judkins, J.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The-facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.

The plaintiff sued upon a fire insurance policy issued by the defendant, and the circuit judge directed a verdict in his favor.

The sole defense relied on was the failure of the plaintiff to furnish proofs of loss within 60 days after the fire. The only testimony offered, aside from the policy, was that of the plaintiff, who testified that very soon after the fire the defendant’s adjuster visited him, and that the plaintiff then had what he termed in his testimony “proofs of loss” made out, and offered them to the adjuster, who assured him that he did not care for them; that they were not…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. O'Brien v. Ohio InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
  2. Gristock v. Royal InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Hoffman v. Michigan Home & Hospital Ass'nMichigan Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Douglas v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaMichigan Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Johnson v. Yorkshire InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Gambino v. Northern Insurance Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1925
  5. Fenton v. National Fire Insurance Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1926

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

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

Powered by the Exa API