Kehler v. New Orleans Ins.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri

Kehler v. New Orleans Ins.

23 F. 709, 1885 U.S. App. LEXIS 1978

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri

DecidedApril 11, 1885

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 23 F. 709 (Kehler v. New Orleans Ins.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kehler v. New Orleans Ins., 23 F. 709, 1885 U.S. App. LEXIS 1978 (circtedmo 1885).

Pincite

Opinion

Treat, J., (orally.)

In the case of Kehler v. New Orleans Ins. Co. there is a motion to set aside verdict and judgment. The original defense to the case was that, under the terms of the policy, it could be canceled on notice given, and that said notice was given before the loss. On the testimony submitted, it appeared the notice was not given. I supposed the contention would be that the broker who negotiated the insurance must be treated as if he were the plaintiff [710]*710himself, or his agent for receiving notice. He is not so. That question was before the supreme court and decided in the case of Grace v. Insurance Co. 109 U. S. 278 ; S. C. 3 Sup. Ct. Rep. 207. His functions terminated when he effected the policy.

Now, this motion goes a step further. It sets up in the affidavit an entirely new defense, which, it seems, was not thought of before, to-wit, that 'the policy executed and delivered to the plaintiff was only on condition that the parent company should assent thereto, which it never did. That is something.that was not in the original pleadings. The party had abundant opportunity to do that originally. Now he wishes to set up a new defense, and reopen the case upon a theory which is utterly inconsistent with his own correspondence on file.

The motion will be overruled.

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

Treat, J., (orally.)

In the case of Kehler v. New Orleans Ins. Co. there is a motion to set aside verdict and judgment. The original defense to the case was that, under the terms of the policy, it could be canceled on notice given, and that said notice was given before the loss. On the testimony submitted, it appeared the notice was not given. I supposed the contention would be that the broker who negotiated the insurance must be treated as if he were the plaintiff [710]*710himself, or his agent for receiving notice. He is not so. That question was before the supreme court and decided in the case of Grace v. Insurance Co. 109 U. S. 278 ; S. C. 3 Sup. Ct. Rep. 207. His functions terminated when he effected the policy.

Now, this motion goes a step further. It sets up in the affidavit an entirely new defense, which, it seems, was not thought of before, to-wit, that 'the policy executed and delivered to the plaintiff was only on condition that the parent company should assent thereto, which it never did. That is something.that was not in the original pleadings. The party had abundant opportunity to do that originally. Now he wishes to set up a new defense, and reopen the case upon a theory which is utterly inconsistent with his own correspondence on file.

The motion will be overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 F. 709, 1885 U.S. App. LEXIS 1978, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kehler-v-new-orleans-ins-circtedmo-1885.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack