Stephenson v. Piscataqua Fire & Marine Insurance
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Exceptions and motion to set aside the verdict as being against law, and manifestly against the weight of evidence. Assumpsit on a policy of insurance, dated Dec. 16, 1861, causing'" Stephenson & Co. * * to be insured * * for whom it concerns, loss, if any, payable to Stephenson & Co., in the sum of seven hundred dollars, on schooner ' Arbutus’ of,” &c., "at and from Portland, Me., to Cardenas, and at and from thence back to a port of discharge in tlie United States.
Read the full summary
On Exceptions and motion to set aside the verdict as being against law, and manifestly against the weight of evidence. Assumpsit on a policy of insurance, dated Dec. 16, 1861, causing'" Stephenson & Co. * * to be insured * * for whom it concerns, loss, if any, payable to Stephenson & Co., in the sum of seven hundred dollars, on schooner ' Arbutus’ of,” &c., "at and from Portland, Me., to Cardenas, and at and from thence back to a port of discharge in tlie United States. The above is to cover their claim for supplies furnished said vessel.” The policy also contained the following among other…
1Opinion of the CourtDickeRSON, J.
Assumpsit on a policy of marine insurance on schooner "Arbutus,” of Freeport, Maine, "at and from Portland to Cardenas, and at and from thence back to a port of discharge in the United States.” The insurance was effected "for whom it concerns,” and the loss made payable to the plaintiffs. The vessel was owned by James C. Rogers, who was also master.
The plaintiffs are met, in limine, with the objection that this action cannot be maintained because of their non-compliance with the following clause in the policy : — " In case any difference or dispute shall arise in relation to any loss…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Walsh v. Washington Marine InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Peyton v. StithSupreme Court of the United States · 1831
- Embree v. EllisNew York Supreme Court · 1807
- Butler v. . MurrayNew York Court of Appeals · 1864
3Cited by28 opinions
- Hunter v. Colfax Consolidated Coal Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1915
- McCoy v. AbleIndiana Supreme Court · 1892
- Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission v. Washington National ArenaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
- United States Asphalt Refining Co. v. Trinidad Lake Petroleum Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1915
- Md.-Nat'l Cap. P. & P. v. Wash. Nat'l ArenaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.