Southern States Fire Insurance v. Tabor

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Southern States Fire Insurance v. Tabor

80 S.E. 536, 14 Ga. App. 193, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 169

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 20, 1914

Docket5254

StatusPublished

This text of 80 S.E. 536 (Southern States Fire Insurance v. Tabor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Southern States Fire Insurance v. Tabor, 80 S.E. 536, 14 Ga. App. 193, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 169 (Ga. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Pottle, J.

The evidence did not authorize a finding that the agent of the insurance company who issued the policy was also agent for the insured, so as to invalidate the contract. The policy having been duly issued and delivered, the failure of the agent to comply with the instructions of his principal, which were not communicated to the insured, to attach to the policy a “rider,” the effect of which would have been to cancel the policy, could not operate to the prejudice of the insured. The sums found as attorney’s fees and damages having been written off by the plaintiff, the verdict as thus reduced was demanded by the evidence, and there was no error in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Pottle, J.

The evidence did not authorize a finding that the agent of the insurance company who issued the policy was also agent for the insured, so as to invalidate the contract. The policy having been duly issued and delivered, the failure of the agent to comply with the instructions of his principal, which were not communicated to the insured, to attach to the policy a “rider,” the effect of which would have been to cancel the policy, could not operate to the prejudice of the insured. The sums found as attorney’s fees and damages having been written off by the plaintiff, the verdict as thus reduced was demanded by the evidence, and there was no error in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 S.E. 536, 14 Ga. App. 193, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 169, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/southern-states-fire-insurance-v-tabor-gactapp-1914.