Dover v. Home Insurance
This text of 93 S.E. 515 (Dover v. Home Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The explanation of the insured, by which he sought to avoid the effect of the issuance of an intermediary policy of fire insurance on the same property in another company without the consent of the defendant, was not tenable under the evidence, which justified the direction of a verdict for the defendant. Civil Code (1910), § 2489. The testimony of the plaintiff in his own behalf would not authorize a finding in his favor, since, when taken in its most unfavorable version, it required a finding against him. Southern Bank v. Goette, 108 Ga. 796 (33 S. E. 974).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
93 S.E. 515, 21 Ga. App. 40, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 403, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dover-v-home-insurance-gactapp-1917.