Pangborn v. Continental Insurance
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Huron. (Beach, J.) Assumpsit on insurance policy. Defendant brings error. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, J.
This action is upon a policy of insurance dated August 21, 1882.
The defenses are—
1. Misrepresentations relative to the title to and incumbrances upon the plaintiff’s property, made in his application.
2. An accord and satisfaction.
In the application for insurance, the plaintiff represented that he owned the property in fee simple, which consisted of 160 acres; that it was incumbered to the amount of $500 only, *684which would be due in 1883; and that the cash value of the land was 14,500.
The case was in this Court once before. See 62 Mich, 638. The plaintiff had, on the first trial, been allowed…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Wilbur v. FloodMichigan Supreme Court · 1867
- Galloway v. HolmesMichigan Supreme Court · 1844
- Gray v. St. JohnIllinois Supreme Court · 1864
- Dunks v. FullerMichigan Supreme Court · 1875
- Michigan Central Railroad v. DunhamMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Randall v. Port Huron, St. Clair & Marine City Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1921
- Daly v. BlairMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
- Pratt v. DavisMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- Seeck v. JakelOregon Supreme Court · 1914
- St. Clair Tunnel Co. v. St. Clair Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.