Franklin Fire Insurance v. Vaughan
Supreme Court of the United States
Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hunt
In seeking to recover the amount insured upon his goods destroyed by fire, tbe insured was bound to prove only his policy, his loss, and the service of preliminary proofs. This proof he made.
The insurance was for $2,500. The jury found the value of the goods destroyed by fire to be $7,204.
Defence is made on the ground of a violation of that condition of the policy which provides, that, “ if the interest of the assured in the property is not absolute, it must be so expressed in the policy, otherwise the insurance shall be void,” and of a misstatement in answering that there was no incumbrance…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Ætna Insurance v. SimmonsNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
- Planters' Insurance v. MyersMississippi Supreme Court · 1877
- Commercial Insurance Co. of California v. FriedlanderIllinois Supreme Court · 1895
- Carson v. Jersey City InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1881
- Miller v. Alliance Ins. Co. of BostonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1881
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.