Pine v. Vanuxem
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Suits on a policy of insurance, on goods in the sloop Sally, William Seabury master, beginning at and immediately from her loading, from Philadelphia to New York. Vanuxem subscribed 600 dollars, and Pratt and Kintzing 769 dollars on the nth August 1797, at a premium of ij per cent. There was a clause in the policy that Indian corn should be free from average. The two causes were tried together by the same jury.
Read the full summary
Suits on a policy of insurance, on goods in the sloop Sally, William Seabury master, beginning at and immediately from her loading, from Philadelphia to New York. Vanuxem subscribed 600 dollars, and Pratt and Kintzing 769 dollars on the nth August 1797, at a premium of ij per cent. There was a clause in the policy that Indian corn should be free from average. The two causes were tried together by the same jury. The plaintiffs shipped on the 29th July 1797, at Alexandria in Virginia, 1800 bushels of Indian corn in bulk, in the sloop *for New York, amounting as per invoice to 1389 dollars and…
1Opinion of the CourtShippen, C. J.
gave it in charge to the jury, that the law will not presume that any one has been guilty of fraud, nor set aside a contract on that ground, unless it be fully and satisfactorily proved. The burthen of the proof lies on the person who would avail himself of the fraudulent conduct imputed; (Park. 242) *33but, from the nature of the thing, circumstantial evidence is all that can be reasonably expected in cases of this nature. It belongs to the jury to say, whether their minds are satisfied, that there has been any misrepresentation in the present instance.
Mr. Rawle, fro quer. Messrs. Ingersoll and…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Dunlap v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 2005
- Connelly v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Delaware · 2016
- Benner v. EvansSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1832
- Dunlap v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 2005