Warfield-Pratt-Howell Co. v. Williamson
Illinois Supreme Court
Writ oe Error to the Appellate Court for the Eirst District;—heard in that court on appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. O. E. Heard, Judge, presiding.
Read the full summary
Writ oe Error to the Appellate Court for the Eirst District;—heard in that court on appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. O. E. Heard, Judge, presiding. The Warfield-Pratt-Howell Company filed, its bill in chancery against William Williamson, the manager, and others, who were the committee of the Merchant Underwriters at the Indemnity Exchange, to recover for a loss occasioned by fire at Sioux City, Iowa, on the 23d day of December, 1904, under six policies of insurance, aggregating $30,000. An answer being filed, the cause was referred to a master to take proofs and report…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Vickers
Plaintiffs in error first contend that even if the policies were in full force at the time of the loss, defendant in error should have brought a separate action at law against each of the five or six hundred subscribers for the pro rata share" that each was liable to contribute to pay this loss. To this contention there is more than one sufficient answer. In the first place, the language as well as the spirit of clause (g) in the agreement shows plainly that the subscribers did not contemplate that, they would be required to bring five or six hundred suits at law in order to collect for a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Guilfoil v. ArthurIllinois Supreme Court · 1895
3Cited by28 opinions
- Dyer Bros. I. Wks. v. Central I. Wks.California Supreme Court · 1920
- Dyer Bros. Golden W. Iron Works v. Cent. Iron WorksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Taggart v. Wachter, Hoskins & Russel, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1941
- Illinois Power Co. v. LathamAppellate Court of Illinois · 1973
- Simpkins v. MarasAppellate Court of Illinois · 1958
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.