Legal Opinion

Jones v. Insurance Co.

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided October 17, 1891PublishedCited by 17 opinions

FROM KNOX. Appeal from Chancery Court of Knox County. H. R. G-ibson, Ch.

1Opinion of the CourtLurton, J.

The fire policy issued by the defendant company on lumber owned by the complainants, contained in its written part a warranty that a' continuous clear space of 150 feet should be maintained between the lumber insured and the saw-mill, dry-kiln, or any wood-working or manufacturing establishment, and that said space should not be used for the handling or piling of lumber *605thereon. This warranty was untrue when made and untrue when the insured property was burned by fire communicated from a saw-mill within the space provided for. The contract of insurance is a conditional one. If no risk…

2Cited by17 opinions

  1. Parsons, Rich & Co. v. LaneSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
  2. Smithart v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Taylor v. Grand LodgeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
  4. Georgia Home Ins. Co. v. RosenfieldCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1899
  5. United States Life Ins. v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1899

12 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