Schroedel v. Humboldt Fire Ins.
This text of 27 A. 1077 (Schroedel v. Humboldt Fire Ins.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
One of the stipulations contained in the contract sued on is : “ The entire policy shall be void .... if the interest of the insured be not truly stated therein ; .... or if the interest of the insured be other than unconditional and sole ownership.” The uncontradicted evidence was that the title to the property was in the plaintiff and his wife jointly. This, in the absence of any proof of fraud or mistake, as to the insertion of the stipulation above quoted, was a flat bar to plaintiff’s recovery. There was therefore no error in directing a verdict for defendant.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
27 A. 1077, 158 Pa. 459, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 1614, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schroedel-v-humboldt-fire-ins-pa-1893.