Insurance money on buildings agreed to be sold, which had been destroyed, to be applied purchase moneys, if the purchaser so elects. Reynard v. Arnold.
A mortgagee with knowledge that his mort- gagor was a naked trust, having purchased the premises at sheriff's sale under the mort-on gage without notice to the real owner, and then obtained a justice's judgment of possess- ion against the latter, was enjoined from The application not a part of the policy. further proceedings to obtain possession. Gor-Statements and representations in an applica- don, v. Baugher. 209 tion are not warranties. Warranty and repre- sentation in insurance defined and distinguish- Cushman v. United States Life Ins. Co.
Where a partner has purchased the interested. of a deceased partner, an injunction pendente lite, will not issue, to restrain the use of the deceased partner's name in the firm name, in a suit by the son of the deceased, who is en- gaged in the same business, when it is not shown that the name was used as a trick or artifice to injure such plaintiff. Phelan v. Col- lender.
“General average per foreign statement" con- strued. English and French rules examined. Mavro v. Ocean Marine Ins. Co.
In an action on an insurance policy to re- cover for the loss of an abandoned vessel, a stringent necessity for such abandonment must be clearly shown. Cobequid Marine Ins. Co.
A committee of lunatic has title to lunatic's personal property. He may collect a loan, and may release a portion of the mortgaged prem-policy. ises securing the loan. Pickersgill v. Read. 342
When an assignee of a policy of insurance diction. The ordinary form of summons pre- offers to pay the premium at a proper time, the scribed by the Code is sufficient against a for- policy will not lapse. The offer is properly eign corporation. Gibbs v. Queen's Ins. Co. made when such party promised to pay the premium when due, if notice was sent to him, and defendant promised to send such notice; or if offered within a reasonable time after a technical default, caused by the omission to give him such notice. Leslie v. Knickerbocker Life Ins. Co.
The fund deposited with the department, under the N. Y. act of 1853, is for the protec- tion and benefit of the general policy holders only, and must be distributed, under the decree of the court, by the Superintendent, and not by a general receiver. The N. Y. act of 1869, examined. People v. Ashbury Life Ins. Co. 240
On the acceptance of an application by the insurer the contract of insurance is complete. The insurer becomes bound for the premium when he has agreed to pay it, and the insurer must indemnify in case of loss. Trian v. Hol- land Purchase Ins. Co. 249
The return of a policy to the agent of an in- surer, who was authorized to cancel policies with instructions to cancel, it is in effect a can- cellation; and taking back that policy neither revives the contract nor makes a new one. Ib.
Where by the terms of a policy, in case the premiums were not paid when due, the policy lapsed and could only be revived upon payment of the premium and a re-examination by a phy- sician, and the last payment was not made, but evidence was given tending to show, and from which the jury found, that before it became due there was an extension of time, and an offer of payment within the extended time, and a refusal to receive. Held, that the extension was not the making of an entire new contract with the necessity for the observance of the pre-requisites, such as a re-examination, but was simply a change of one of the terms of the contract yet in life, and that the policy was not forfeited. Dean v. Etna Life Ins. Co. 281
Relation of application on a policy in a com- pany which has been surrendered, on a policy in another_company taken in place thereof. Cheever v. Union Central Life Ins. Co.
Where an application is not made a part of a policy by its terms, the insured can only be held to the substanial truth of his answers. 1b.
Such an application is not a warranty. But the answers are material as matter of law. lb.
When the general agent of a company has asked questions as to a special disease or dis- eases of a list of diseases, the company will be deemed to have waived answers as to the other diseases enumerated. lb.
Unless the company notify the insured that his application has not been accepted, before the delivery of the policy, there is authority in the general agent to consumate the contract,
An omission of the applicant to state matters not called for is not a concealment, and will not affect the validity of the policy. lb.
When the insured person states that he has never had a certain disease, and it is shown that he had such disease, that is a warranty, and material to the contract, even if the repre- sentations were made innocently. Cushman v. United States Life Ins. Co. 441
The term capital in the internal revenue act
An insurer can insist that the insured shall is not used in a technical sense, but in its ordi- furnish copies of invoices as a condition pre-nary signification, and it applies to the fund cedent to bring suits. Au inability to make a which is the basis of the business sought to be literal compliance may not be fatal to a re-taxed by the act. Bailey v. Clark. covery, but it must be shown. O'Brien v. Com- monwealth Ins. Co.
A summons served on the agent designated by a foreign insurance corporation gives juris-
Parties who sell goods as commission mer- chants, are to be taxed under the internal reve- nue laws as wholesale dealers. Slack v. Tucker.
It is a substantial right in a party to a suit that the original list from which the jury shall be struck shall be forty-eight in number, and there can be no substitution of one name for another. 548
As to proceedings to Enforce Judgment, see People v. Tweed. EXECUTION.
As to Injunctions to restrain proceedings upon dence to prove what persons have been selected. The statutes do not permit any extrinsic evi- judgments, see INJUNCTION. The written evidence is conclusive.
The extent of the original jurisdiction of the supreme court of Pennsylvania and its present
A person may have two residences, though but one domicile, and when it appcars that he has resided, for the greater part of the time, from the first day of October to the thirtieth day of June for several years in a certain place, he is by the statute liable as a juror there. Ib.
A juror was on the general list correctly written "J. C, Jr.," and on the struck jury "J. W. C." This was not material, for the law recognizes but one Christian name, and the word junior is in law no part of a name 1b.
Talesmen to complete a struck jury" will be summoned, as in completing the ordinary jury. People v. Tweed. 570
The Pa. act of March 21, 1872, gives double the value of goods distrained for rents against the persons making an illegal distress, not against the party in whose name the distress was taken. Fretton v. Karcher. 157
It is competent to show, in a suit for rent due, that the tenant was deprived of the light from a skylight, to which he was entitled under the lease. Morgan v. Smith.
The landlord is liable for any unreasonable interruption of the tenant's business in making necessary repairs to the leased premises, though the lease allowed repairs to be made, and the tenant consented thereto. White v. Mealio.
A tenant holding premises after landlord has told him that the rent is increased assents to the increase. Mack v. Burt. 378
Persons obtaining goods, which are to be re- turned if not sold, and with the purpose to ap- propriate them to their own use, and so appro- priating them, commit larceny. Kraft v. People. 464
It is competent to show that the accused ob- tained other goods of other parties than those charged in the indictment to show the intent, and to show then partners in crime. lb.
Bequest, when complete. Effect of the fail- ure of testator to carry out certain intentions. Yates v. University College, etc. 74
It is competent in libel to show in mitigation of damages that a retraction has been published. Samuels v. Evening Mail Association. 424
It is competent to show what the plaintiff said as to the damage done. lb.
It is doubtful whether it is proper to instruct the jury, that the injury to the plaintiff's feel- ings is a specific element of damage. Ib.
A solicitor cannot set a lien acquired in a cause against the rights of other parties in the cause to production. Held, where the plain- tiff demanded the production of certain docu- ments by defendant on the trial, who deposed that his former solicitors had a lien on the doc- uments for their unpaid bill. Vail v. Oppert.
Where A and B each took a mortgage on the same property for the purchase money, and it was the intention of the parties that such mort- gages should be liens equal in priority, and one of the mortgages was recorded before the other and assigned to C, and by him to D, both of whom were ignorant of the understanding as to the equality of the liens. Held, that the record- ing act gave the first mortgage recorded the priority, and that that insured to the successive assignees, who were without notice of the agreement. Green v. Deal.
Where a defendant was indicted for selling strong and spirituous liquors and wines, in quantities less than five gallons at a time with- out having a license therefor, as provided by law, Held, that the gist of the offense charged, under the law consisted not in the act of sell- ing, but the purpose for which the sale was made, and to make out offense charged, it must be proved that the accused not only sold the liquor, but that he sold it to be drank on the premises. Huffstaters v. People. 345
Will lie to compel audit of bill for expendi- tures, when the amount of the bill is appro- A proceeding in rem. against a vessel for a priated. People v. Board of Audit, &c.
maritime contract cannot be had in a state court. Campbell v. Sherman.
Will not lie to compel former clerk to have access to the books and records of a county The clerk has clerk's office to index them. exclusive control and, by statute, must make the regular indexes. People v. Welch. 137
Will not lie to compel auditor and trea- surer of a state to pay money forbidden to be paid by the legislature Wilson v. Jenkins 160
« SebelumnyaLanjutkan » |