Burns v. Provincial Insurance

New York Supreme Court

Burns v. Provincial Insurance

13 Abb. Pr. 425, 35 Barb. 525

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedSeptember 15, 1861

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 13 Abb. Pr. 425 (Burns v. Provincial Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Burns v. Provincial Insurance, 13 Abb. Pr. 425, 35 Barb. 525 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1861).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

*— Ingraham, J.

—Although this case may not be within the strict reading of section 427 of the Code, the atit of 1849, ch. 107, will sustain the attachment. By that act, which professes to -extend the remedies against foreign insurance corporations, it is provided- that suits may be brought against such companies upon any contract, made or delivered -within this State. The contract here sued on is the policy of insurance. The affidavit of-De Wolf, the plaintiff’s agent, is positive that the contract was made and the policy issued to the witness at the city of Hew York and not elsewhere. The evidence to the contrary on the part of the defendants is only on information, and does not contradict the allegation that the contract was delivered or issued in Hew York.

I think the order should be reversed. ■

Present, Clerke, P. J., Ingraham and Leonard, JJ.

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

By the Court.

*— Ingraham, J.

—Although this case may not be within the strict reading of section 427 of the Code, the atit of 1849, ch. 107, will sustain the attachment. By that act, which professes to -extend the remedies against foreign insurance corporations, it is provided- that suits may be brought against such companies upon any contract, made or delivered -within this State. The contract here sued on is the policy of insurance. The affidavit of-De Wolf, the plaintiff’s agent, is positive that the contract was made and the policy issued to the witness at the city of Hew York and not elsewhere. The evidence to the contrary on the part of the defendants is only on information, and does not contradict the allegation that the contract was delivered or issued in Hew York.

I think the order should be reversed. ■

Present, Clerke, P. J., Ingraham and Leonard, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 Abb. Pr. 425, 35 Barb. 525, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burns-v-provincial-insurance-nysupct-1861.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack