Legal Opinion
Harter v. Ph&338nix Ins. Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided March 2, 1932No. Docket No. 45, Calendar No. 35,905PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
A loss of articles placed, either inadvertently or purposely, in a friendly fire, is not compensable under a policy against loss by fire, and it was unnecessary to word a policy so as to cover such contingency.
In Reliance Insurance Co. v. Naman, 118 Tex. 21 (6 S.W. [2d] 743), recovery was denied for a loss of jewelry, placed for safe-keeping in a paper hat box, which was inadvertently thrown into the furnace. The court stated:
"A friendly fire is not within the undertaking of the insurance company at all. If it were, the company would be liable, as in a case of unfriendly fire, for all direct…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Reliance Insurance Co. v. NamanTexas Supreme Court · 1928
- Weiner v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1924
3Cited by6 opinions
- Mode, Ltd. v. Fireman's Fund InsuranceIdaho Supreme Court · 1941
- Salmon v. Concordia Fire Ins. Co. of MilwaukeeLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1935
- Youse v. Employers Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1951
- Cole v. United States Fire Ins. Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1933
- Watson v. American Colony Ins. Co. of N.Y.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1936
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.