Bloomingdale v. Columbia Insurance

84 N.Y.S. 572
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided November 6, 1903·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

BISCHOFF, J.

The condition of the policy in suit that the insured “shall not enter into any special agreement with the carrier re[573] leasing them from their common-law or statutory liability,” and that the insurer might demand subrogation to the rights of the insured against the carrier, was obviously broken by the actual and undisputed release of the carrier as entered into by the insured and continued during the life of the policy. This being an absolute condition and unambiguous, the breach avoided the policy, irrespective of any reasons which may have led the parties to make it (Foot v. Ins. Co., 61 N. Y. 575), and the plaintiff could certainly not be excused by the attempt to show that the fire in transit was of an incendiary origin for which the carrier was not liable, even if not released. The question of the carrier’s liability was something which the defendant, when subrogated, was entitled to litigate with-the carrier, and the question was concluded against the defendant by the release given in violation of the condition agreed to by the insured.

Judgment reversed, with costs, and, since the facts cannot be changed upon a new trial, judgment is ordered for the defendant, with costs. All concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bloomingdale v. Columbia Insurance, 84 N.Y.S. 572 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1903).

84 N.Y.S. 572 (Bloomingdale v. Columbia Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rogers v. American Fidelity & Casualty Co.
145 A.2d 344 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1958)
Universal Credit Co. v. Service Fire Insurance
25 S.E.2d 526 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1943)
Camden Fire Insurance v. Bleem
132 Misc. 22 (New York City Court, 1928)
Franklin Fire Insurance v. Weinberg
197 A.D. 576 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1921)
Franklin Fire Insurance v. Weinberg
110 Misc. 644 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1920)
Smith v. Phoenix Insurance
168 S.W. 831 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1914)
Maryland Motor Car Ins. Co. v. Haggard.
168 S.W. 1011 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1914)