McLain v. British & Foreign Marine Ins.

35 N.Y.S. 827, 70 N.Y. St. Rep. 248
City of New York Municipal Court·Decided October 29, 1895·Published

Opinion

McCARTHY, J.

We have given this case very careful study, and think that the various objections claimed by the appellant have been met, and the case was correctly submitted to the jury. The complaint was proper in form, and sufficiently complied with claim of appellant. See Code Civ. Proc. § 533. The authority cited by [829] appellant as controlling this case, to wit, Van Wickle v. Insurance Co., 97 N. Y. 350, 353, is distinguished in the case oí Singleton v. Insurance Co., 132 N. Y. 298, 303, 304, 30 N. E. 839, and in our judgment meets this case.

We find no errors, and the judgment must be affirmed, with costs.

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

McLain v. British & Foreign Marine Ins., 35 N.Y.S. 827, 70 N.Y. St. Rep. 248 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1895).

35 N.Y.S. 827 (McLain v. British & Foreign Marine Ins.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Van Wickle v. Mechanics & Traders' Insurance
97 N.Y. 350 (New York Court of Appeals, 1884)
Singleton v. Phenix Insurance
30 N.E. 839 (New York Court of Appeals, 1892)