Gristock v. Royal Insurance
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Clinton. (Edget, J., presiding.) Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
The plaintiff's buildings, consisting of one two-story frame dwelling-house and two barns, and the hay, grain, and farming implements therein, were insured with the defendant. They were destroyed by fire October *16417, 1888. The policy required proofs of loss to be submitted within 30 days after the loss occurred. No such proofs were made. Plaintiff commenced suit August 20, 1889. The case was regularly brought to trial, and plaintiff recovered verdict and judgment.
1. Plaintiff admits a failure to submit proofs of loss, but claims that they were waived. One Faxon was the local agent of the company…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- O'Brien v. Ohio InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1883
- Security Insurance v. FayMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
3Cited by14 opinions
- Corporation of the Royal Exchange Assurance v. FranklinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1924
- Hanson v. Homeland Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
- Gristock v. Royal InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Improved-Match Co. v. Michigan Mutual Fire InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
- Popa v. Northern InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1916
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.