Phœnix Insurance v. McLoon
This text of 100 Mass. 475 (Phœnix Insurance v. McLoon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
No rule of the law of insurance is better settled by authority than that by which, when the insured has some interest at risk, and there is no fraud, a valuation of the subject insured in the policy is held conclusive upon the parties, at law and in equity. Hodgson v. Marine Insurance Co. 5 Cranch, 100; S. C. 6 Cranch, 206, and 7 Cranch, 332. Alsop v. Commercial Insurance Co. 1 Sumner, 451. Irving v. Manning, 6 C. B. 391; S. C. 1 H. L. Cas. 287. Barker v. Janson, Law Rep. 3 C. P. 303. 3 Kent Com. (6th ed.) 273. Coolidge v. Gloucester Insurance Co. 15 Mass. 341. Robinson v. Manufacturers’ Insurance Co. 1 [477]*477Met. 147. Fuller v. Boston Insurance Co. 4 Met. 206. And none is better founded in reason. The very object of putting the contract into the form of a valued, instead of an open policy, is to prevent disputes as to the amount to be recovered by the assured in case of a total loss by the perils insured against and the premium paid to the insurers is regulated accordingly.
In this case, it is admitted that the assured had a large interest at risk, and the question of fraud in the overvaluation has been submitted to a jury, and answered in his favor. Judgment must therefore be entered on the verdict in the action at law, and the bill in equity to cancel the policy
Dismissed, with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
100 Mass. 475, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phnix-insurance-v-mcloon-mass-1868.