Luma v. Atlantic Mut. Ins.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts

Luma v. Atlantic Mut. Ins.

15 F. Cas. 1109, 13 Hunt Mer. Mag. 557

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts

DecidedDecember 15, 1845

StatusPublished

This text of 15 F. Cas. 1109 (Luma v. Atlantic Mut. Ins.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Luma v. Atlantic Mut. Ins., 15 F. Cas. 1109, 13 Hunt Mer. Mag. 557 (circtdma 1845).

Pincite

Opinion

HELD

BY THE COURT

(WOODBURY, Circuit Justice)

that distinct and separate losses on the vessel, could not be added to getlier to make up five per cent., and that the [1110]*1110assured could not recover, unless lie proved a single loss to that amount; but that it was a question for the jury, whether the losses here were distinct or not; that where one loss was consequent.upon another, however remote in time, it was to be taken as part of the antecedent loss, and if both amounted to five per cent., the assured would recover.

THE COURT left to the jury three questions, upon which they were to find specific answers. The only one of these material to the report of the case upon the foregoing facts, was, whether there was any loss consequent upon the cause, amounting to five per cent. Upon this, the jury found there was such a loss, and assessed the damages at $230, the amount claimed by the plaintiff being $394.

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

HELD

BY THE COURT

(WOODBURY, Circuit Justice)

that distinct and separate losses on the vessel, could not be added to getlier to make up five per cent., and that the [1110]*1110assured could not recover, unless lie proved a single loss to that amount; but that it was a question for the jury, whether the losses here were distinct or not; that where one loss was consequent.upon another, however remote in time, it was to be taken as part of the antecedent loss, and if both amounted to five per cent., the assured would recover.

THE COURT left to the jury three questions, upon which they were to find specific answers. The only one of these material to the report of the case upon the foregoing facts, was, whether there was any loss consequent upon the cause, amounting to five per cent. Upon this, the jury found there was such a loss, and assessed the damages at $230, the amount claimed by the plaintiff being $394.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 F. Cas. 1109, 13 Hunt Mer. Mag. 557, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/luma-v-atlantic-mut-ins-circtdma-1845.