Stradford v. National Reserve Insurance

Michigan Supreme Court

Stradford v. National Reserve Insurance

225 N.W. 932, 247 Mich. 556, 1929 Mich. LEXIS 796

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 8, 1929

DocketDocket No. 80, Calendar No. 34,264.

StatusPublished

This text of 225 N.W. 932 (Stradford v. National Reserve Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Stradford v. National Reserve Insurance, 225 N.W. 932, 247 Mich. 556, 1929 Mich. LEXIS 796 (Mich. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

Potter, J.

Defendant insured plaintiff’s barber shop against loss by fire. The shop burned, defendant was notified of the loss, and its adjuster visited the premises and interviewed plaintiff. No proof of loss was filed in accordance with the terms of the policy. It is claimed defendant’s negotiations with plaintiff waived filing such proof. Plaintiff sued on the pplicy to recover the amount of his loss. The case was tried without a jury, and judgment rendered for defendant. Plaintiff brings error. If defendant did not waive the filing of proof of loss by plaintiff there can be no recovery. Defendant claimed there was no waiver and there was ample *557 evidence to support its claim. The trial court found for defendant on this disputed but decisive question of fact. We ought not, under the circumstances, to disturb his finding. Inasmuch as this finding is controlling, the other assignments of error become unimportant.

Judgment affirmed, with costs to defendant.

North, C. J., and Fead, Fellows, Wiest, Clark, McDonald, and Sharpe, JJ., concurred.

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

Potter, J.

Defendant insured plaintiff’s barber shop against loss by fire. The shop burned, defendant was notified of the loss, and its adjuster visited the premises and interviewed plaintiff. No proof of loss was filed in accordance with the terms of the policy. It is claimed defendant’s negotiations with plaintiff waived filing such proof. Plaintiff sued on the pplicy to recover the amount of his loss. The case was tried without a jury, and judgment rendered for defendant. Plaintiff brings error. If defendant did not waive the filing of proof of loss by plaintiff there can be no recovery. Defendant claimed there was no waiver and there was ample *557 evidence to support its claim. The trial court found for defendant on this disputed but decisive question of fact. We ought not, under the circumstances, to disturb his finding. Inasmuch as this finding is controlling, the other assignments of error become unimportant.

Judgment affirmed, with costs to defendant.

North, C. J., and Fead, Fellows, Wiest, Clark, McDonald, and Sharpe, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 N.W. 932, 247 Mich. 556, 1929 Mich. LEXIS 796, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stradford-v-national-reserve-insurance-mich-1929.