Fidelity Mutual Fire Insurance v. Hancock

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Fidelity Mutual Fire Insurance v. Hancock

9 Pa. Super. 480, 1899 Pa. Super. LEXIS 60

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedFebruary 17, 1899

DocketAppeal, No. 77

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 9 Pa. Super. 480 (Fidelity Mutual Fire Insurance v. Hancock) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fidelity Mutual Fire Insurance v. Hancock, 9 Pa. Super. 480, 1899 Pa. Super. LEXIS 60 (Pa. Ct. App. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Opraioir by

Orlady, J.,

The defendant substantially admits in his affidavit of defense that he became a member of the plaintiff company by purchasing and accepting his policy, and paying a premium thereon for one year; and that he had received a full, due, and legal notice of the assessments for which this suit was brought. He discloses no fact which shows any fraud or mistake in determining the amount of the assessment, and at most alleges that the amount is more than necessary to pay losses and expenses. He is not required to furnish an audit of the business of the company, but should state with precision the facts on which he bases his allegation, to show that there was fraud or gross mistake in the assessment, or a sufficient reason for the omission should be given, as he was a member of the company, and had not only access to the books but did in fact examine them. The [483]*483company has a reasonable discretion in determining the amount of an assessment in view of the liabilities: Buckley v. Ins. Co., 92 Pa. 501.

As he does not print the policy of insurance attached to and .made a part óf the plaintiff’s statement, we do not have before us the conditions and provisions under which the assessment was made, except those set out in the body of the statement, which, standing alone, are adequate to fully sustain the demand.

The affidavit is not sufficient, and the judgment is affirmed.

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

Opraioir by

Orlady, J.,

The defendant substantially admits in his affidavit of defense that he became a member of the plaintiff company by purchasing and accepting his policy, and paying a premium thereon for one year; and that he had received a full, due, and legal notice of the assessments for which this suit was brought. He discloses no fact which shows any fraud or mistake in determining the amount of the assessment, and at most alleges that the amount is more than necessary to pay losses and expenses. He is not required to furnish an audit of the business of the company, but should state with precision the facts on which he bases his allegation, to show that there was fraud or gross mistake in the assessment, or a sufficient reason for the omission should be given, as he was a member of the company, and had not only access to the books but did in fact examine them. The [483]*483company has a reasonable discretion in determining the amount of an assessment in view of the liabilities: Buckley v. Ins. Co., 92 Pa. 501.

As he does not print the policy of insurance attached to and .made a part óf the plaintiff’s statement, we do not have before us the conditions and provisions under which the assessment was made, except those set out in the body of the statement, which, standing alone, are adequate to fully sustain the demand.

The affidavit is not sufficient, and the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 Pa. Super. 480, 1899 Pa. Super. LEXIS 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fidelity-mutual-fire-insurance-v-hancock-pasuperct-1899.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack