(87) (88) (90) statement as to what his earnings were before discharge and conditions existing in reference to business after discharge, admissible. American Nat. Ins. Co. vs. Van Dusen (Tex.). Evidence was sufficient to sustain court's finding as to amount of re 54 378 472 covery. San Antonio Life Ins. Co. vs. Griffith (Tex.).. Allegation that plaintiff complied with all the rules and regulations of company and laws of state prior to revocation of license are not put in issue by denial where there is no claim that plaintiff was discharged for any violation. Where license was canceled by insurer and performance thus rendered impossible, agent could not maintain action for breach of contract. Rose V8 Bristol (NY) Letter to agent gave agent no authority to make contract of insurance. Browne vs. Commercial Union Assur. Co. (Cal.). Company is bound by its agent's ostensible or apparent knowledge. Fidelity-Phenix Fire Ins. Co. vs Ray (Ala.).. An agent having all the powers generally accredited to general agents is deemed a general agent of an insurer. Porter vs. General Acc., Fire & Life Assur. Corp., Ltd. (Cal.)... 242 Authority to complete contracts primarily differentiates general from soliciting agent. Browne vs. Commercial Union Assur. Co. (Cal.). 472 Ordinarily an agent cannot effect a waiver in the face of limitation in policy. Porter vs. General Acc, Fife & Life Assur. Corp., Ltd. (Cal) Provision restricting power of agent to waive conditions applies to something that occurs after policy has been issued. Johnson & Stroud vs. Rhode Island Ins. Co. (N. C.).. Evidence held to warrant jury in finding that soliciting agent was required to report losses, and that insured was warranted in relying on his représentations. Concordia Fire Ins. Co. et al. vs. Mitchell (Ark.) 316 242 644 (92) 96 (93) (94) Company was not liable for agent's retention of premium paid for policy 95 215 (95) Notice to countersigning agent is notice to company. Cohen vs. Home 318 Johnson & 644 (B) Knowledge of agent was to be imputed to insurer. AGENCY FOR APPLICANT OR INSURED. (96) Agent owed his company certain duties as to issuing or not issuing of policy on property described and to make him agent of intended insured, so as to bind him to obtain a policy in one of the companies represented by him, would be to impose upon him a dual agency with conflicting duties to his two principals, which could not be done without knowledge or consent of the insurance company. Manis vs. Pruden (Ga.)..... Plaintiff was bound by representations made to defendant in application prepared by broker who solicited insurance since such broker was in that respect the agent of the plaintiff, notwithstanding the statute which defines an agent. Salzano VS Marine Ins. Co., Ltd. (N. Y.) Direction to broker to take care of her insurance constitutes broker general agent. Ferrar vs. Western Assur. Co (Cal.). (97) Agent representing company cannot become in his individual character agent of property owner. Manis vs. Pruden (Ga.).. (112) Ratification of action of broker in procuring policy for insured, though made subsequent to loss, is valid. Ferrar vs. Western Assur. Co. (Cal.) (114) One who has no insurable interest can not collect proceeds, Metro politan Life Ins. Co. vs. Nelson (Ky.). (115) Property incumbered by $30,000 prior mortgage, was worth $60,000, so that plaintiff had a prior interest exceeding amount of policy. Dodge vs. Grain Shippers' Mut. Fire Ins. Ass'n (Iowa). In absence of arrangement with mortgagor, mortgagee could only insure mortgaged property to extent of its interest. Stuyvesant Ins. Co. vs. Reid et al. (N. C.)... Plaintiff had an insurable interest in the hay since he might hold it against all the world except the landlord. Hudson VS. Glens Falls Ins. Co. (N. Y.)... 180 100 108 Executory contract between plaintiff, an officer of brewing company, whereby he contributed $2,500 and insured $1,000 to purchase on saloon fixtures, reciting that the $2,500 remained unpaid, and containing provision that no beer except that manufactured by plaintiff's company should be handled by insured, was severableinsured acquired insurable interest in premises. Marx VS. Williamsburgh City Fire Ins. Co. (Mich.).. 205 513 (116) Creditor has insurable interest in the life of debtor. Ins. Co. vs. Nelson (Ky.). Metropolitan Life 180 (121) Policy may be legally assigned in N. Y. to one not having an insurable interest. Foryciarz vs. Prudential Ins. Co. of America (N. Y.).. 29 (121) Assignee has insurable interest in goods. Hecker vs. Commercial State Bank of Carrington (N. D.).... (122) Subsequent agreement between insured and beneficiary cannot affect rights of insurer. O'Connor's Admr. vs. Equitable Life Assur. Society of United States (Ky.).. 543 183 180 Insurable interest applies with equal force after life policy is issued. (123) Wife on being divorced ceased to have interest as beneficiary in policy. Northwestern Mut. Life Ins. Co. vs. Whiteselle (Tex.). 507 186 176 (124) By-laws referred to in the application related only to fixed quarterly Delay of bank in forwarding application must be considered as act (131) Parol contract of insurance is valid. Agent was authorized to make (134) Paper containing iron safe clause enclosed in envelope with blank_for (136) Application does not constitute contract until approved. Tainter vs. 102 13 74 235 288 413 423 546 546 127 24 One, having authority to take applications, etc., has no power bind 242 When insurer mails policy to applicant, delivery is complete and liability attaches as soon as policy is placed in post office. Williams vs. Phila. Life Ins. Co. (S. C.).. 504 268 Life policy different from one applied for must be rejected within reasonable time after delivery and retention is proof of acceptance. Lyke vs. American Nat. Assur. Co. (Mo.) When there is claim of fraud in application and procurement of policy, it cannot be said that transmission of policy to agent is same as delivery to insured. Fitzgerald vs. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. (Vt.). 508 Fact that insured did not know there was to be an iron safe clause in policy would be immaterial if it was in fact a part. Merchants' & Bankers' Fire Und. vs Brooks (Tex.). (137) If application is accepted, policy is unconditionally deposited in the post office, addressed to applicant, either by company direct or agent, applicant to pay premium, and nothing to the contrary expressed in the policy, a binding contract of insurance is made. Hartwig Vs. Etna Life Ins. Co. (Wis.).. 546 235 Payment of first premium by agent did not make policy effective. Lyke vs. American Nat. Assur. Co. (Mo.). (138) The fact that where rider attached to an accident policy had not been filed with Superintendent of Insurance, does not render it invalid. Hopkins vs. Connecticut General Life Ins. Co. (N. Y.) Beneficiary of policy canot recover on the ground of invalidity of rider, since, if that falls for want of authority of agent, the contract as a whole is void. Hopkins vs. Connecticut General Life Ins. Co. (N. Y.).... Code making it unlawful for company to write policy unless counter- (140) War rider was in violation of statute and will be discarded, and policy Holder of policy who had possession thereof for long time before loss, Allegations were sufficient to authorize conclusions that company waived necessity of signature of local agent. Rogers vs. American Nat. Ins. Co. (Ga.)... Where insurer issues policy knowing the conditions, it cannot avoid responsibility. Johnson & Stroud VS. Rhode Island Ins. Co. (N. C.) (143) Carelessness of assured in not examining policies, held not of such character as would prevent reformation to permit striking therefrom average clause and making it blanket policy. Carlton Lumber Co. vs. Lumber Ins. Co. (Ore.)... Where insurer advises insured that automobile policy did not cover loss but direct collision and insured nevertheless elected to retain it, he accepted the policy as complying with his application and could not have it reformed to cover such loss. Browne vs. ComCommercial Union Assur. Co. (Cal.) (145) Renewal premium receipt, purporting to continue a policy in force, which permits payment of premium within sixty days, fixes liability on insurer from date of acceptance by insured, not from date of premium. Insured might accept by signifying intention within reasonable time. Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. vs. Vogel (U. S.) 268 127 127 550 452 452 452 24 56 104 556 556 644 424 472 228 361 (B) Renewal of policy or bond constitutes a separate and distinct contract. 418 (146) Intention is to be obtained first from the language of entire policy in connection with risk or subject-matter. Dodge vs. Grain Shippers' Mut. Fire Ins. Ass'n (Iowa).. Contracts of fire insurance are strictly construed against insurer. Policies are prepared by experts who know and can anticipate the 100 99 141 192 Policy of accident insurance is not an exception to the rule that contracts of insurance are contracts of indemnity. Lemaitre VS. National Casualty Co. (Mo.). 339 Contract of surety company executing its bond for a consideration must be construed most strictly in favor of obligee. Commercial Bank vs. Maryland Casualty Co. (Mo.).. 360 Policy is to be given effective, if permissible, as if it was intended to 463 639 644 If policy is ambiguous in any of its terms, it is to be more strongly construed against insurer. Rosenfeld vs Travelers' Ins Co. of Hartford, Conn (N. Y.).. Forfeitures are looked upon with ill favor and will be enforced only when strict letter of contract requires it. Friend VS Southern States Life Ins. Co. (Okla ).... 659 627 (147) Law of place of performance governs as to its construction and legal effect. Flittner vs. Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of the U S. (Cal.). 176 Maryland law governs policy delivered and countersigned by agent in state. Cohen vs. Home Ins Co (Del.). 318 Accident policy issued to one residing in the city of St. Louis and who died there, was to be interpreted in connection with the suicide statute of the state. Brunswick vs. Standard Acc. Ins. Co (Mo.). 436 (152) Policy must be read in connection with Insurance Law, requiring contract to be expressed in policy. Edelson vs. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. (N. Y.). Mutual fire charter in which it seeks to evade liability will be strictly construed against it. Leonard vs Farmers' Mutual Fire Ins Co. (Mich) 26 542 (153) When one construction is legal and binding and other is not, first will be adopted. Johnson & Stroud vs. Rhode Island Ins. Co. (N C). 644 (154) "Paid and Satisfied" in liability policy as applied to judgment, means that judgment is fully paid and does not necessarily mean canceled of record There is no legal liability of insurance company to corporation other than insured. Philadelphia Pickling Co Maryland Casualty Co. (N. J.)... VS. (155) While agents cannot waive or alter, their acts and representations may be considered as to companies' interpretation of policies. Foryciarz vs. Prudential Ins. Co. of America (N. Y.). (163) "Farm utensils" is broader than the term "garden tools." Murphy vs. Continental Ins. Co. (Iowa).. The language of the policies covered the linotype machine. Review Printing Co. vs. Hartford Fire Ins. Co. et al. (Minn.). "All other merchandise" had reference to the same kind of merchandise, and did not cover loss of ice cream. E. H. Emery & Co. vs. American Ins. Co. (Iowa).. Furniture and fixtures include light fixtures, globes, etc Fire Association vs. Powell (Tex.).. (164) Clause that company should not be liable in excess of actual cash value of insured's interest, related to the situation where the ownership was less than legal. Home Mut. Fire Ins. Co. vs. Pittman (Miss.) (165) Policy covering hay in stack does not cover hay in mow of barn. Murphy vs. Continental Ins. Co. (Iowa). (169) One who attempted to enter street car was a passenger within the meaning of an accident policy even though it was closed before he had entered. Fay vs. Etna Life Ins. Co. (Mo.)... (175) Incontestability period was from date of policy and not from date of delivery. Meridian Life Ins Co vs. Milam (Ky.).. (177) Policy had not lapsed at time of insured's death. Edington VS. Michigan Mut. Life Ins. Co. (Tenn.). (179) Bond separately stating limit of liability growing out of acts of each employee was in legal effect a separate bond as to each employee named in the schedule attached to it, so that the bank could not recover for theft of which some one of three of its employees must have been guilty, the particular guilty one being undetermined. American Sav. Bank & Trust Co. vs. National Surety Co. (Wash.) 590 29 102 219 416 549 104 102 441 611 53 253 No right is retained in the policy to cancel without consent of insured and by implication it is not weekly premium insurance renewable at option of company for only the life insurance element of policy is so called. National Life Ins. Co. vs. Jackson (Ga.).... 492 (179) Provision upon default that pledge of policy should be foreclosed by satisfying indebtedness, is reasonable and practical method of settling contract. Ruane vs. Manhattan Life Ins. Co. (Mo.).... 287 Provision for deduction of unpaid loans from cash surrender value is reasonable and valid. Hartford Life Ins. Co et al. vs. Benson (Tex.) Assured surrendered policy for cash and died before check was re- VI. Premiums, Dues and Assessments. (181) Upon death of principal, an executor's bond, furnished by surety company, can earn no further premiums. American Surety Co. vs. Cabell (Okla) (183) The fact that assured failed to include the salaries of its manager and bookkeeper in its report of compensation paid did not entitle insurer to recover premiums based thereon. Fidelity & Casualty Co. vs. Tyler Cotton Oil Co. (Tex.).. 475 161 (186) Whether time for payment of premiums is of the essence of the contract, depends altogether on the wording thereof, and it cannot be said that as matter of law time is of essence. North American Ins. Co. vs. Jenkins (Tex.).... ... 140 Payment to attorney employed by broker to collect premium was payment to company. Whitlock et al. vs. Greenberg et al. (N. Y.).. 215 Where court deducted from amount awarded to insured full amount of his premium note, including amount due on warehouse which was not destroyed, insured would hold the policy for amount insured on warehouse during time for which premium has been paid. Merchants' & Bankers' Fire Und vs. Brooks (Tex)...... 546 Where policy provides dues shall be paid on certain date, company cannot without consent of policyholder change it. Barber vs. Hartford Life Ins. Co. (Mo.).. Unconditional delivery by insurer's agent amounts to waiver of advance payment York vs Sun Ins. Office (Ind.) (188) Superior Court did not err in sustaining certiorari and rendering final judgment. Chewning vs. Tucker (Ga.)... .... Evidence was sufficient to support a finding that defendant rendered insurer true statements of a pay roll. Fidelity & Casualty Co. vs. Tyler Cotton Oil Co. (Tex.). 391 652 44 163 (191) Executive officers lacked power to levy assessment unauthorized by directors or by-laws. Barber VS Hartford Life Ins Co. (Mo.).. 391 (198) Whether insured was inexcusably negligent was for jury. Federal Life Ins. Co. vs. Hoskins (Tex.)... 56 Fact that insured paid premiums before, at time they fell due, to agents or collectors of company, would not relieve her from obligation to remit such premiums directly to the nearest office of company where no agent called for or demanded payment when due. Favors vs. Bankers' Health & Life Ins. Co. (Ga.). 494 Counsel fee paid by surety company in action to recover first installment 615 615 VII. Assignment or Other Transfer of Policy. (199) Ordinarily a policy is assignable as any other chose in action. Foryciarz vs. Prudential Ins. Co. of America (N. Y.). (207) Where charter of insurer required written endorsement of consent of president and secretary to all assignments, there can be no recovery on theory that plaintiff was assignee, where no written consent to assignment was endorsed on policy. Leonard VS. Farmers' Mutual Fire Ins. Co. (Mich.) (208) Fire policy may be pledged or assigned orally. Hecker vs. Commercial State Bank of Carrington (N. D.).. (209) Writing order on company to pay proceeds of policy to plaintiff not sufficient to vest title. Holleran VS. Prudential Ins Co. of America (U. S.)... (212) Assignment of industrial policy by married woman to secure money is good as against insured. Foryciarz vs. Prudential Ins. Co. of America (N. Y.).. (213) Unconditional assignment vests beneficial interest in assignee. Devin et al vs Connecticut Mut. Life Ins Co. et al (Okla.). Where life policy has been assigned to wife and is in her possession, presumption of delivery to wife arises. Devin et al. vs. Connecticut Mut. Life Ins. Co et al (Okla).. (222) Assignee had right to convert policy into paid-up policy upon notice to insured. Bush vs. Block et al. (Mo.). 29 542 543 171 29 294 294 290 VIII. Cancellation, Surrender, Abandonment, or Rescission of Policy (226) Fire policy may be canceled at any time before loss by agreement between the parties. Westchester Fire Ins. Co VS. McMinn (Tex) 548 |