Freeman v. Fulton Fire Insurance
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from an order at special term, overruling a demurrer to the complaint, on the ground that it did not contain facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The action was upon a policy of insurance against loss by fire, issued by the defendants, April 26,1861, upon the steamer “ Cataline.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order at special term, overruling a demurrer to the complaint, on the ground that it did not contain facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The action was upon a policy of insurance against loss by fire, issued by the defendants, April 26,1861, upon the steamer “ Cataline.” The complaint stated: “ That at the time of the issuing of the policy,, Charles A. Stetson, Jr., was the owner of the ‘ Cat-aline.’ That in consideration of the payment by the plaintiffs, who thereto were employed by and therein acted as agents of the said Stetson, to the defendants, of the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.—Emott, J.
If the case of Fowler a. N. Y. Indemnity Ins. Co. (23 Barb., 143); decided that an averment of interest in the insured is unnecessary in declaring on a fire policy, it cannot be sustained. The cases to which Judge Strong refers to sustain his remark to that effect will be found, all of them, to be cases of marine insurance. In such cases, an averment of interest was unnecessary, for such policies were valid as wager policies, although the plaintiff had, in fact, no interest in the subj ect insured. Of course, therefore, neither an averment nor proof of interest could be…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Considerant v. . BrisbaneNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Buchanan v. Ocean Insurance Co.New York Supreme Court · 1826
3Cited by10 opinions
- Hardwick v. State InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1891
- Singleton v. St. Louis Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
- Chrisman v. State InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1888
- Friscia v. Safeguard InsuranceCivil Court of the City of New York · 1968
- Burton v. Connecticut Mutual Life InsuranceIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.