Schenck v. State
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On error to Essex Circuit. This suit is brought in the name of the state on the complaint of the insurance commissioner, for the recovery of the penalty incurred by the defendant below by violating the insurance laws of this state. There is no dispute as to the facts. The defendant negotiated a contract of insurance, and delivered a policy of insurance against fire on property in this state, and recovered the premium therefor.
Read the full summary
On error to Essex Circuit. This suit is brought in the name of the state on the complaint of the insurance commissioner, for the recovery of the penalty incurred by the defendant below by violating the insurance laws of this state. There is no dispute as to the facts. The defendant negotiated a contract of insurance, and delivered a policy of insurance against fire on property in this state, and recovered the premium therefor. The policy was in the “Metropolitan Lloyds of New York City.” From the language of the policy it appears that the insurance contract was a several contract with twenty…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Garrison, J.
From the foregoing statement, which is excerpted from the brief of counsel for the defendant in error, it is evident that if there exist no valid legislative authority •for the action he has brought, no other question should be considered. In my opinion there is no valid authority for inflicting upon the agent of an individual insurer the penalty provided by the several.acts of the legislature upon which sole reliance is placed.
The course of legislation upon this subject in this state has been as follows, the significant feature being the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Moresh v. O'ReganNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1936
- New York v. ParkerBurlington County Circuit Court, N.J. · 1936
- Sun Insurance Office of London v. MerzSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1899
- State v. KeiperUnion County Court · 1939