Mutual Fire Ins. v. Wagner ex rel. Rider
Opinion
We discover no sufficient cause for reversing this judgment. The jury has found that the plaintiff below did not bum the buildings. It is clear, under the authorities, that he had an insurable interest in the property. He had a direct pecuniary interest therein, so as to be damaged by its destruction. This constitutes an insurable interest. Strong v. Manufacturers’ Ins. Co. 10 Pick. 40, 20 Am. Dec. 507; Wood, Ins. § 266; Williams v. Roger Williams Ins. Co. 107 Mass. 377, 9 Am. Rep. 41; Coursin v. Pennsylvania Ins. Co., 46 Pa. 323; Farmers’ & M. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Meckes, 10 W. N. C. 306.
The case was well submitted.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1 Sadler 66 (Mutual Fire Ins. v. Wagner ex rel. Rider) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.