Phenix Ins. v. Grimes

50 N.W. 168, 33 Neb. 340, 1891 Neb. LEXIS 180
CourtNebraska Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 5, 1891
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 50 N.W. 168 (Phenix Ins. v. Grimes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Phenix Ins. v. Grimes, 50 N.W. 168, 33 Neb. 340, 1891 Neb. LEXIS 180 (Neb. 1891).

Opinion

Maxwell, J.

This is an action upon a policy of insurance to recover for the death of a colt. On the trial of the cause a jury was waived and the cause tried to the court, which found in favor of the defendant in error and rendered judgment for the value of the animal. The cause was submitted to the court upon the following stipulation of facts: “ It is agreed by and between the parties plaintiff and defendant, that this policy was issued by the defendant to the plaintiff; that on or about the 16th of July, 1888, the loss occurred, a colt belonging to the plaintiff was killed by lightning on the land described in the policy, which land had been [342]*342sold and conveyed by the plaintiff to a third party some time in March, 1888, but that the plaintiff was still in possession thereof; that he was the owner of the land at the time the policy was issued; that the colt was of the value of $60 at the time it was killed; that on the 20th of July, 1888, the plaintiff gave notice to S. F. Holmes, the agent of the insurance company; that on the 28 th of July, 1888, the plaintiff made proofs of loss, now offered in evidence and marked £ Plaintiff’s Exhibit B ’; that no part of the personal property was incumbered, nor had the title thereof been transferred in any way; that the amount of loss or any part of it has not been paid, nor has the premium or any portion thereof been repaid or tendered to plaintiff.

“ The buildings described in the policy are situated upon said land which had been conveyed by plaintiff in March, 1888; that a receipt of the proofs of loss in July, 1888, was the first notice defendant had of said conveyance of the said property; that the paper now offered in evidence marked ‘Defendant’s Exhibit A,’ is the original application in pursuance of which the policy sued on was issued.

“It is further agreed that at the time of the loss plaintiff was the owner of five horses, mules, and colts.”'

The policy of insurance is as follows:

“No. 0221426. $1,300.

“By the policy of insurance the Phcenix Insurance Co., of Brooklyn, N. Y., in consideration of cancellation of policy No. 065622 and dollars cash and the payment at maturity of eleven dollars, for which the insured hereafter named has executed a certain promissory note or obligation of even date herewith, and payable of the 1st day of January, 1887, do insure J. C. Grimes against loss or damage by fire or lightning to the amount of thirteen hundred dollars, as follows:

“ $300 on one story, shingle roof, frame building while occupied by assured, as dwelling No. 1 (including foundation, cellar, or basement walls).

[343]*343“$175 on household furniture, useful and ornamental, family wearing apparel, printed books, plate and plated ware, paintings and engravings and their frames (in case of loss no one to be valued at more than cost), sewing machines, trunks, canes, umbrellas, family supplies and fuel, while contained in dwelling No. 1.

“$75 on shingle roof frame barn No. 1 (including foun- • dation).

“$50 on shingle roof frame granary.

“ $200 on grain in granaries, or in barns, or in cribs, or in dwelling, or in stacks on cultivated land, not over $75 on any one stock.

“classification of animals.

“$300 on horses, mules, and colts (class 1), while in barn or on farm, and against lightning while on or off premises.

“$200 on cattle (class 2), while in barn or on farm, and against lightning while on or off premises.

It is hereby expressly provided and mutually agreed, and it is made one of the considerations upon which this contract is based, that in case of loss or damage to any animal the limit of claim upon this company shall be the amount produced by dividing the total amount insured upon the class to which the animal belongs (as above classified), by three-fourths of the total number of animals of such class owned by the assured at the time of the loss or damage, it being understood, however, that in no case (except in the case of more valuable animals insured specially hereunder by names or numbers) shall this company be liable for more than $100 on any one horse, mule, or colt, $50 on any one head of cattle, $5 on any one sheep, or $10 on any one hog, nor in any case for more than the actual cash value of the animal destroyed or damaged.

“Situated (except as otherwise provided) on, and confined to, premises now actually owned and occupied by the assured, to-wit, 80 acres, section N. E. ¿ 35, township 4, range 11, Johnson county, Nebraska.

[344]*344“And the Phoenix Insurance Company hereby agrees to make good unto the assured, his executors, administrators, or assigns, on receipt of proof, satisfactory to the company, at its Chicago office, all such immediate loss or damage (at the time of loss) not exceeding in amount the sum or sums insured as above specified, nor the interest of the assured in the above described property, as shall happen by fire or lightning to the property so specified from the 26th day of April, 1886, at 12 o’clock at noon, to the 26th day of A.pril, 1889, at 12 o’clock at noon.

“ But it is expressly agreed that this company shall not be liable for any loss or damage that may occur to the property herein mentioned while any promissory note or obligation, given for the premium, remains past due and unpaid.

“This insurance is based upon the representations contained in the assured’s application of even number herewith on file in the company’s office in Chicago, Illinois, each and every statement of which is hereby specifically made a warranty and a part hereof; and it is agreed that if any false statements are made in said application, this policy shall be void; or if the assured shall have, or hereafter accept, any other insurance on the above mentioned property, whether valid or not, or if the above mentioned buildings be or become vacant or unoccupied, or be used for any other purpose than is mentioned in said application, without consent indorsed hereon, or if the property shall hereafter become mortgaged or incumbered, or upon the commencement of foreclosure proceedings, or in case any change shall take place in the title, possession, or interest of the assured in the above mentioned property, or if the assured shall not be the sole and unconditional owner in fee of said property, or if this policy shall be assigned, or if the risk be increased in any manner except by the erection and use of ordinary out-buildings, without consent indorsed hereon, then, in each and every one of the above cases, this policy shall be null and void.

[345]*345“ The use of gasoline or other light products of petroleum for lighting, heating, or cooking is prohibited, and will render this policy void without consent indorsed hereon. Kerosene oil may be used for lights.

“ In case the assured fails to pay the premium note, or order, at the time specified, then this policy shall cease to be iu force, and remain null and void during the time said note or order remains unpaid after its maturity, and no legal action on the part of this company to enforce payment shall be construed as reviving the policy. The payment of the premium, however, revives the policy, and makes it good for the balance of its term.

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

Related

Jensen v. Lincoln Hail Insurance
249 N.W. 94 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1933)
Home Fire Insurance v. Bernstein
75 N.W. 839 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1898)
Johansen v. Home Fire Insurance
74 N.W. 866 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1898)
Nappanee Furniture Co. v. Vernon Insurance
37 N.E. 1064 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1894)
German Insurance v. York
48 Kan. 488 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1892)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
50 N.W. 168, 33 Neb. 340, 1891 Neb. LEXIS 180, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phenix-ins-v-grimes-neb-1891.