Smith v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins.

45 F. Supp. 305, 1942 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2773
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. New York
DecidedMay 27, 1942
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 45 F. Supp. 305 (Smith v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Smith v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins., 45 F. Supp. 305, 1942 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2773 (E.D.N.Y. 1942).

Opinion

ABRUZZO, District Judge.

The plaintiff has brought this action for damages from the defendant on the ground that the defendant is withholding and converted to its own use without right all of the business of the plaintiff which consists of an insurance agency.

This agency carried on in the main a baggage insurance business. In connection with the agency, Lewis C. Smith, deceased, husband of the executrix bringing this suit, made agreements with railroad ticket agencies, travel agencies, steamship and bus agencies. Lewis Smith in his lifetime made an agreement with the defendant, Saint Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, hereinafter called Saint Paul, by virtue of which all of the baggage insurance obtained by said Smith was to be turned over by him as agent to St. Paul. Smith also acted as baggage insurance agent for Commercial Union Assurance Co., Ltd., but in July of 1934 he relinquished his agency for Commercial Union and up until his death he transacted business solely with the defendant.

Smith died on July 31, 1937. It is alleged by the plaintiff that the defendant, after her husband’s demise, took over the agency, its contracts, business records, books of accounts, stationery, policies of insurance, trade-name, lists of customers, sub-agents, office employees and good will; and converted same to its own use to the exclusion of any individual or executory [306]*306rights which Josephine N. Smith, .plaintiff, might have in this agency.

Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, from January 1, 1932, to July 31, 1937, the date of the death of Lewis C. Smith, he was empowered to select various persons, including travel agents, steamship agents and railroad ticket agents and bus ticket agents to write baggage insurance and to issue Saint Paul baggage insurance policies. The agents were appointed by Saint Paul pursuant to the laws of the various states in which such agents operated. These agents actually sold and issued policies to the traveling public. It was their duty to report directly to Lewis C. Smith and remit all premiums to him, less their commission. He, in turn, was to account for and pay to Saint Paul all the premiums thus collected, less his commission. These commissions constituted Lewis C. Smith’s whole compensation as agent. He was to receive forty-seven and one-half (47%%) per cent of the gross premium (premium paid by the purchaser of the policy). Under the provisions of the agreement, Smith was to pay all the commissions of the agent who actually issued the policy and all other expenses pertinent to the conducting of the agency including: office overhead, rent, salaries, and so forth; license fees; printing of policies and supplies; expenses of adjusting losses and traveling expenses. Saint Paul was to receive fifty-two and one-half (52%%) per cent of the .premiums and was to bear all baggage losses sustained and pay taxes on the premiums.

The evidence revealed that out of his share of forty-seven and one-half (47%%) per cent, Smith paid railroad agents an average of 37%, steamship companies an average of 35% and travel agents and bus lines an average of 30% (plaintiff’s exhibits 20 and 23, rec. 462-3). Consequently, Smith’s net income was approximately 12%% or 12%^ of every premium dollar; and it was from that income he had to run his office and pay all of the expenses enumerated above.

In answer to this alleged conversion of the agency, Saint Paul has interposed the following defenses:

1. General denial.

2. That the whole agency, with all records and everything thereunto appertaining, was transferred to defendant by plaintiff in consideration of a debt of $63,277.08 for unreported insurance premiums owing by the agency to defendant.

3. That in any event upon the death of the agent the agency terminated, and defendant became entitled to the possession of all the books, records, and policies pertaining to its business risks and obligations, past and future.

4. That the agency had no status independent of the "principal and that the records of the agent were the property of the principal.

There is no dispute between the parties that upon the death of Smith, the agency contract between Smith and Saint Paul was terminated and at an end.

There is no question that the Lewis C. Smith Agency was indebted to Saint Paul in the sum of $63,277.08 on the date of Smith’s death for premiums collected on behalf of Saint Paul but never transmitted to them. This issue was tried before a trial term of this district and this anTount was fixed as due and owing from Smith to Saint Paul.

In the event, that a verdict were to be rendered in favor of the plaintiff, the amount so due must be deducted therefrom.

This action originally appeared on the jury calendar but a jury was waived and the case proceeded to trial before this Court without a jury. The defenses interposed by the Saint Paul in effect are merged into one main one, to wit, that it was justified in taking over the agency under the circumstances.

It is conceded and the evidence amply indicates that the defendant took over the agency, including the contracts, business records, books of accounts and other items above enumerated, and continued this baggage insurance business for its own use and benefit, and that the plaintiff has received nothing by way of remuneration.

The evidence indicates conclusively that Saint Paul overreached the plaintiff and converted the agency to its 'own use without legal right. It has sought to substantiate its action and conduct, claiming it was justified in taking the agency because of the large debt owed to it; but manifestly it could not simply convert the agency to its own use in the manner adopted by it. The Saint Paul made itself the judge of the facts, gave itself a judgment; and, so to speak, at a private sale, bought the agency without paying anything for it because of the debt of $63,277.08 owed to it. Thus, Mrs. Smith’s share and any assets due possible creditors of the agency were quickly [307]*307and completely wiped out. The possible value of the agency at that time was destroyed. The evidence amply justifies this conclusion.

After the demise of Smith on July 31, 1937, the books, records and other pertinencies of the Smith agency were turned over to Saint Paul. The plaintiff contends that they were to be returned after an inventory and audit were made. The Saint Paul maintains that an agreement was reached with the plaintiff whereby the agency with all its appurtenances were to be turned over to Saint Paul for operation to offset the debt due and owing the Saint Paul by the deceased Smith. The agency was operated for a short period of time by Mrs. Smith with the consent of the Saint Paul. One Donovan, plaintiff’s attorney at that time, apparently conducted the insurance agency for her. He was on the payroll and was paid by checks drawn and signed by Mrs. Smith on the account of the Smith agency.

On August 7, 1937, consent was given to inventory and audit the books of the agency (rec. 43-44). On that date, it appears from the testimony, the parties became somewhat estranged.

It was the desire of Mrs. Smith, the plaintiff, to continue the agency and she was endeavoring to secure authority from Saint Paul to do so. She desired to obtain a new agreement.

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

Related

Smith v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins.
46 F. Supp. 935 (E.D. New York, 1942)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
45 F. Supp. 305, 1942 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2773, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-st-paul-fire-marine-ins-nyed-1942.