Phillips v. Maryland Casualty Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Phillips v. Maryland Casualty Co.

201 A.D. 866

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 15, 1922

StatusPublished

This text of 201 A.D. 866 (Phillips v. Maryland Casualty Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Phillips v. Maryland Casualty Co., 201 A.D. 866 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment reversed on law and facts and complaint dismissed, with costs to the defendant, appellant, upon the opinion of H. T. Kellogg, J., in Phillips v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. (200 App. Div. 208), decided herewith. All concur, except Kiley, J., dissenting on his memorandum in that ease. Hinman, J., not sitting. The court disapproves of findings Nos. 15, 16, 17, 18, 22, 23, 24, 25, 31-, 32, 33, 34, 35, 41, 44. It finds the defendant’s [867]*867requests to find numbered as follows: 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35, 36, 41, 46, 47, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 65, 66, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 88, 90, 93, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101. It finds the facts stated in requests Nos. 20, 37, 38, 42, 44, 45, except the statements as to knowledge and participation of the New York National and Seneca Fire Insurance Companies. It also finds conclusions of law Nos. 3 and 4. It finds that irrespective of the evidence as to the Boland Company overdrafts and irrespective of defendant’s Exhibit No. 13 the Seneca Fire Insurance Company at the time it procured the bond in suit had knowledge of the insolvency of the North Penn Bank. Order and findings to be settled before H. T. Kellogg, J.

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

Judgment reversed on law and facts and complaint dismissed, with costs to the defendant, appellant, upon the opinion of H. T. Kellogg, J., in Phillips v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. (200 App. Div. 208), decided herewith. All concur, except Kiley, J., dissenting on his memorandum in that ease. Hinman, J., not sitting. The court disapproves of findings Nos. 15, 16, 17, 18, 22, 23, 24, 25, 31-, 32, 33, 34, 35, 41, 44. It finds the defendant’s [867]*867requests to find numbered as follows: 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35, 36, 41, 46, 47, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 65, 66, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 88, 90, 93, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101. It finds the facts stated in requests Nos. 20, 37, 38, 42, 44, 45, except the statements as to knowledge and participation of the New York National and Seneca Fire Insurance Companies. It also finds conclusions of law Nos. 3 and 4. It finds that irrespective of the evidence as to the Boland Company overdrafts and irrespective of defendant’s Exhibit No. 13 the Seneca Fire Insurance Company at the time it procured the bond in suit had knowledge of the insolvency of the North Penn Bank. Order and findings to be settled before H. T. Kellogg, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

201 A.D. 866, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phillips-v-maryland-casualty-co-nyappdiv-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack