Nichols & Co. v. Sun Mutual Insurance

71 Miss. 326
Mississippi Supreme Court·Decided October 15, 1893·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Campbell, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The judgment is right. The stipulation of the policy is unmistakable, to the effect that if a building fall, except as the result of fire, insurance was immediately to cease. The building fell, not as the result of fire, and fire broke out as the result of the fall of the building. Therefore, the insurer was not liable for the loss. “ The fire did not produce the fall, but the fall produced the fire, and the destruction was by the former,” etc. 2 May on Insurance, § 412; Ostrander on Fire Insurance, § 248; Wood on Fire Insurance, § 85; Insurance Co. v. Congregation, 80 Ill., 558; Insurance Co. v., Ende, 65 Texas, 118, and other cases cited in the text-books.

Affirmed.

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

Nichols & Co. v. Sun Mutual Insurance, 71 Miss. 326 (Mich. 1893).

71 Miss. 326 (Nichols & Co. v. Sun Mutual Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nalley v. Hanover Fire Insurance
193 S.E. 619 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1937)