Legal Opinion

King v. Concordia Fire-Insurance

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided May 22, 1905No. Docket No. 169PublishedCited by 42 opinions

Error to Benzie; Chittenden, J. Assumpsit by Wallace E. King against the Concordia Fire-Insurance Company on a policy of insurance. There •was judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtCarpenter, J.

Defendant insured plaintiff’s stock of general merchandise against loss by fire. A fire occurred, and the merchandise was destroyed. This suit was brought to recover on the policy. Plaintiff had judgment in the-court below. Defendant appeals to this court.

The most important of plaintiff’s books of account and the inventory of his goods (which were kept in a wooden *260desk in the store containing his merchandise) were also destroyed by the fire above mentioned. Defendant insists that it was entitled to a judgment because these books and inventory were not kept in “an iron safe at night, or in…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Field v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Dowling v. Lancashire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Goddard v. East Texas Fire InsuranceTexas Supreme Court · 1886
  4. Georgia Railroad v. SmithSupreme Court of Georgia · 1883
  5. Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co. v. DeyU.S. Circuit Court for the Southern District of Iowa · 1888

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Wisconsin Inspection Bureau v. WhitmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
  2. In Re Brewster Street Housing SiteMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
  3. New York Life Insurance v. HardisonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
  4. Westervelt v. Natural Resources CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1978
  5. Chemical Bank & Trust Co. v. County of OaklandMichigan Supreme Court · 1933

37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API