Baldwin v. Chouteau Insurance
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to St. Louis Circuit Court. Plaintiff being unable to pay the premium refused to accept the policy till after the fire,.when he obtained it by concealing that fact. The contract of Insurance could not consist with such refusal. In Keim vs. Home Mnt. Eire Ins. Co. (42 Mo., 38,) no demand was ever made upon Waterman for the premium; and there was no refusal on his part.
Read the full summary
Error to St. Louis Circuit Court. Plaintiff being unable to pay the premium refused to accept the policy till after the fire,.when he obtained it by concealing that fact. The contract of Insurance could not consist with such refusal. In Keim vs. Home Mnt. Eire Ins. Co. (42 Mo., 38,) no demand was ever made upon Waterman for the premium; and there was no refusal on his part. I. When the company on the same day proceeded to make out and sign the policy, it ratified the application and its consent was complete. The acceptance of a proposal to insure for the premium offered, is the completion of…
1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge
In Keim, et al. vs. Home Mutual Fire and Marine Ins. Company (42 Mo., 38), we decided that vidiere an application for insurance was filed, and on the same day the company proceeded to make out and sign the policy, it ratified the application and its consent was complete; that the acceptance of the proposal to insure for-the premium offered was the completion of the negotiation ; and that when the company accepted the premium and delivered the policy, the agreement to insure was complete and executed, and related back to the day when the application was filed and the policj^ made out and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Commercial Mutual Marine Insurance v. Union Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1857
- Lightbody v. North American InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1840
- Keim v. Home Mutual Fire & Marine InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
- American Horse Insurance v. PattersonIndiana Supreme Court · 1867
- Whitaker v. Farmers' Union InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1859
3Cited by17 opinions
- Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. of Cal. v. O'NeilSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Malin v. Mercantile Town Mutual InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1904
- Huggins Cracker & Candy Co. v. People's InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890
- Schoneman v. Western Horse & Cattle InsuranceNebraska Supreme Court · 1884
- E. S. Brownfield & Brother v. Phœnix Insurance Co. of LondonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.