Legal Opinion

Kinneer v. Southwestern Mutual Fire Ass'n

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 6, 1936No. Appeal, 31PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Maxey,

This was an action in assumpsit to recover on a policy of fire insurance. On May 1,1929, appellee issued a policy of insurance to appellant under the terms of which it insured his dwelling house against fire. This policy contained a provision reading as follows: “Insured buildings becoming vacant and remaining vacant or unoccupied for over ten days, without the consent of the company duly obtained, renders the policy void.”

During the month of June, 1930, the premises became vacant or unoccupied. Appellant secured from the company three sixty-day permits in…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Herrman v. . Merchants' Insurance Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1880
  2. Yost v. Anchor Fire InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Foley v. Sonoma County Farmers' Mutual Fire InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Estate of Luster v. Allstate InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API