St. Onge v. Springfield Fire & Marine Insurance

Appellate Court of Illinois

St. Onge v. Springfield Fire & Marine Insurance

204 Ill. App. 139, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 301

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedFebruary 10, 1917

DocketGen. No. 6,347

StatusPublished

This text of 204 Ill. App. 139 (St. Onge v. Springfield Fire & Marine Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

St. Onge v. Springfield Fire & Marine Insurance, 204 Ill. App. 139, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 301 (Ill. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Dibell

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. 1. Insurance, § 280*—when additional fire insurance is permitted by acts of agent. Where an insurance agent issued to a party a policy of fire insurance upon his stock of goods which provided that other insurance was not permitted, the agent knowing at the time that other insurance was already on the goods, and the insured believing such policy permitted other insurance as he intended, and the agent retained possession of the policy for such party at his request for safe-keeping and insured did not see the policy until after the fire, held that the agent understood and meant by delivering such policy to permit other insurance without limitation on the amount thereof, and such policy would not he invalidated by the issuance of a subsequent policy by another company. 2. Insurance, § 654*—when evidence as to additional fire insurance is immaterial. Where additional insurance was permitted in a fire policy, held that it would be immaterial in an action on such policy for a loss whether other insurance was in force when the policy was issued or that other insurance was issued thereafter and canceled before the loss, and that there was no error in refusing to admit evidence as to such other insurance.

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

Mr. Justice Dibell

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. 1. Insurance, § 280*—when additional fire insurance is permitted by acts of agent. Where an insurance agent issued to a party a policy of fire insurance upon his stock of goods which provided that other insurance was not permitted, the agent knowing at the time that other insurance was already on the goods, and the insured believing such policy permitted other insurance as he intended, and the agent retained possession of the policy for such party at his request for safe-keeping and insured did not see the policy until after the fire, held that the agent understood and meant by delivering such policy to permit other insurance without limitation on the amount thereof, and such policy would not he invalidated by the issuance of a subsequent policy by another company. 2. Insurance, § 654*—when evidence as to additional fire insurance is immaterial. Where additional insurance was permitted in a fire policy, held that it would be immaterial in an action on such policy for a loss whether other insurance was in force when the policy was issued or that other insurance was issued thereafter and canceled before the loss, and that there was no error in refusing to admit evidence as to such other insurance.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 Ill. App. 139, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 301, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/st-onge-v-springfield-fire-marine-insurance-illappct-1917.