Weiss, 106 Pa. St. 20, 23 Atl. Rep. 991; Home Ins. Co. v. Davis, 98 Pa. St. 280; German-American Ins. Co. v. Hocking, 115 Pa. St. 398; Weiss v. American Ins. Co., 148 Pa. St. 349, 23 Atl. Rep. 991; McGonigle v. Susquehanna Ins. Co., 168 Pa. St. 1, 31 Atl. Rep. 868, 24 Ins. L. J. 808. 2. German-American Ins. Co. v. Hocking, supra. Powell v. Agricultural Ins. Co., 2 Pa. Sup. Ct. 151. RULE 33. And see Statements in Proofs not Evidence of Amount of Loss. The statements in the statement or proof of loss do not themselves become evidence of the facts or extent of the loss;1 and proofs of loss cannot be objected to, when offered in evidence of compliance with the condition, upon the ground that they contain untrue statements.2 But a schedule of the property attached may be used upon a trial, in connection with the testimony of the insured, to refresh his recollection." 1. Scottish Union & Nat. Ins. Co. v. Keene, 85 Md. 263, 37 Atl. Rep. 33, 26 Ins. L. J. 963; Cummins v. German-American Ins. Co., 192 Pa. St. 359, 43 Atl. Rep. 1016; Rosenberg v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., 209 Pa. St. 336, 56 Atl. Rep. 671; Newmark v. London & L. Ins. Co., 30 Mo. 160; Bonner v. Home Ins. Co., 13 Wis. 677; Citizens' Ins. Co. v. Doll, 35 Md. 89; Hiles v. Hanover Ins. Co., 65 Wis. 585; Knickerbocker Ins. Co. v. Gould, 80 Ill. 388; Edgerley v. Farmers' Ins. Co., 48 Iowa, 644; Baile v. St. Joseph Ins. Co., 73 Mo. 371; Williams v. Hartford Ins. Co., 54 Cal. 442; Southern Ins. Co. v. Lewis, 42 Ga. 587; Home Ins. Co. v. National Bank, 88 Tenn. 369, 12 S. W. Rep. 915; Planters' Ins. Co. v. Comfort, 50 Miss. 662; Moadinger v. Mechanics' Ins. Co., 2 Hall, 527; Sexton v. Montgomery Ins. Co., 9 Barb. 191; Cascade Ins. Co. v. Journal Publishing Co., 1 Wash. 452; Tucker v. Colonial Ins. Co., W. Va. 51 S. E. Rep. 86. 2. Runkle v. Hartford Ins. Co., 99 Iowa, 414, 68 N. W. Rep. 712. 3. Wooldridge v. German Ins. Co., 69 Mo. App. 413; Names v. Union Ins. Co., 104 Iowa, 612, 74 N. W. Rep. 14. And see Coleman v. Association, 77 Minn. 31; Cheever v. Scottish Union Ins. Co., 86 App. Div. 328, 83 N. Y. Supp. 730. RULE 34. Insured not Estopped or Bound by his Statements in Proofs. The insured is not bound or estopped by his statements in the statement or proof of loss, either as to value or extent of the loss or otherwise; mistake or actual facts may at any time subsequently be claimed or established, even down to the trial of an action brought to recover the insurance,' but statements may be evidence against him; but as an admission a necessary fact to sustain a defense will not be assumed by construction; nor can the company take advantage of a misstatement caused by fault of its own adjuster.* 1. Bentley v. Standard Ins. Co., 40 W. Va. 729, 23 S. E. Rep. 584; Kahn v. Traders' Ins. Co., 4 Wyo. 419, 34 Pac. Rep. 1059, 23 Ins. L. J. 401; Etna Ins. Co. v. Strout, 16 Ind. App. 160, 44 N. E. Rep. 934; Corkery v. Security Ins. Co., 99 Iowa, 382, 68 N. W. Rep. 792, 26 Ins. L. J. 331; Names v. Union Ins. Co., 104 Iowa, 612, 74 N. W. Rep. 14; Knop v. National Ins. Co., 101 Mich. 359, 59 N. W. Rep. 653, 24 Ins. L. J. 65; Connecticut Ins. Co. v. Schwenk, 94 U. S. 593; Mead v. American Ins. Co., 13 App. Div. 476, 43 N. Y. Supp. 334; Miaghan v. Hartford Ins. Co., 24 Hun, 58; White v. Royal Ins. Co., 8 Misc. 613, 29 N. Y. Supp. 323; Frankfurter v. Home Ins. Co., 6 Misc. 49, 26 N. Y. Supp. 81; Parmalee v. Hoffman Ins. Co., 54 N. Y. 193; McMaster v. Insurance Co. of N. A., 55 N. Y. 222; Cummins v. Agricultural Ins. Co., 67 N. Y. 260; Rockey v. Firemen's Ins. Co., 83 App. Div. 638, 82 N. Y. Supp. 120; Smiley v. Citizens' Ins. Co., 14 W. Va. 33; Cook v. Lion Ins. Co., 67 Cal. 368; Hanover Ins. Co. v. Lewis, 28 Fla. 209, 10 So. Rep. 297; Schmidt v. Mutual Ins. Co., 55 Mich. 432; Lebanon Ins. Co. v. Kepler, 106 Pa. St. 28; Waldeck r. Springfield Ins. Co., 53 Wis. 129; Commercial Ins. Co. v. Huckberger, 52 Ill. 464. 2. New York Central Ins. Co. v. Watson, 23 Mich. 486; Continental Ins. Co. v. Hulman, 92 Ill. 145; Antes v. Western Ins. Co., 84 Iowa, 355, 51 N. W. Rep. 7; Insurance Co. of N. A. v. Zaenger, 63 Ill. 462, 467; Insurance Co. v. Newton, 22 Wall. (U. S.) 32, 35; Mosley v. Vermont Ins. Co., 55 Vt. 142; Ætna Ins. Co. v. Stevens, 48 Ill. 31, 35; Hennesy v. Niagara Ins. Co., 8 Wash. 91, 35 Pac. Rep. 585, 23 Ins. L. J. 796. 3. McMaster v. Insurance Co. of N. A., 55 N. Y. 222; Cumberland Ins. Co. v. Giltinan, 19 Vroom (N. J.), 495. And see Hanover Ins. Co. v. Parrotte, 47 Nebr. 576, 66 N. W. Rep. 636. 4. Star Union Lumber Co. v. Finney, 35 Nebr. 214, 52 N. W. Rep. 1113. RULE 35. Waiver by Local Agent. A local agent authorized to make contracts of insurance by issue of policies has no authority as such to waive proofs of loss; but when same are furnished by the assured as suggested by the local agent who issued the policy, and are received and retained by the company and acted upon by it through an investigation by a special agent or adjuster, without objection, there is sufficient evidence of waiver;2 and so where the adjuster or company makes the local agent the medium of communication with the assured, the latter's authority may become a question of fact; and so the authority of the local agent may become a question of fact where he is accustomed to receive and forward notices and proofs of loss; and delivery of proofs to a local agent may be sufficient to set the time running for exercise of option to replace or rebuild, etc., and so delivery to local agent may be sufficient where not objected to and acted upon. 1. Shapiro v. St. Paul F. & M. Ins. Co., 61 Minn. 135, 63 N. W. Rep. 614, 24 Ins. L. J. 774; Ermentraut v. Girard Ins. Co., 63 Minn. 305, 65 N. W. Rep. 635; Burlington Ins. Co. v. Kennerly, 60 Ark. 532, 31 S. W. Rep. 155, 25 Ins. L. J. 40; Dwelling-House Ins. Co. v. Snyder, 59 N. J. L. 18, 34 Atl. Rep. 931; Ruthven v. American Ins. Co., 92 Iowa, 316, 60 N. W. Rep. 663, 24 Ins. L. J. 266; Knudson v. Hekla Ins. Co., 75 Wis. 198, 43 N. W. Rep. 954; Harrison v. Hartford Ins. Co., 59 Fed. Rep. 732, 23 Ins. L. J. 161; McCollum v. North B. & M. Ins. Co., 65 Mo. App. 304; Hicks v. British-America Assur. Co., 162 N. Y. 284, rev'g 13 App. Div. 444; Bush v. Westchester Ins. Co., 63 N. Y. 531; Van Allen v. Farmers' Ins. Co., 64 N. Y. 469; Heusinkveld v. St. Paul F. & M. Ins. Co., 106 Iowa, 229, 76 N. W. Rep. 696; Smith v. Niagara Ins. Co., 60 Vt. 682, 15 Atl. Rep. 353; Wadhams v. Western Assur. Co., 117 Mich. 514, 76 N. W. Rep. 6; Gould v. Dwelling-House Ins. Co., 90 Mich. 302, 51 N. W. Rep. 455; Lohnes v. Insurance Co. of N. A., 121 Mass. 439; Engebretson v. Hekla Ins. Co., 58 Wis. 301, 17 N. W. Rep. 5; Barry & Finan Lumber Co. v. Citizens' Ins. Co., Mich. 98 N. W. Rep. 761; Perry v. Caledonian App. Div. , 93 N. Y. Supp. 50. Ins. Co., 2. Weber v. Germania Ins. Co., 16 App. Div. 596, 44 N. Y. Supp. 976. And see Western Assur. Co. v. White, Miss. 25 So. Rep. 594; Carroll v. Girard Ins. Co.. 72 Cal. 297, 13 Pac. Rep. 863. 3. Bolan v. Fire Assoc., 58 Mo. App. 225; Lycoming Ins. Co. v. Schollenberger, 44 Pa. St. 259; Morgan v. Illinois Ins. Co., 130 Mich. 427, 90 N. W. Rep. 40; Sergent v. Liverpool, L. & G. Ins. Co., 155 N. Y. 349, 49 N. E. Rep. 935. 4. Minneapolis & St. P. R. R. Co. v. Home Ins. Co., 64 Minn. 61, 66 N. W. Rep. 132; Van Allen v. Farmers' Ins. Co., 10 Hun, 397, affd. on opinion of lower court, 72 N. Y. 604; Harnden v. Milwaukee Mechanics' Ins. Co., 164 Mass. 382, 41 N. E. Rep. 658. 5. Insurance Co. of N. A. v. Hope, 58 Ill. 75. 6. McCullough v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 113 Mo. 606, 21 S. E. Rep. 207. Exceptions. Where there is no limitation shown upon the authority of the local agent, authorizing him to countersign and issue policies, and policy does not require proofs to be delivered to any one else such local agent may receive or waive proofs of loss. McCollum v. Hartford Ins. Co., 67 Mo. App. 66, 76; Nickell v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 144 Mo. 420, 46 S. W. Rep. 435, 27 Ins. L. J. 880; McCullough v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 113 Mo. 606, 21 S. W. Rep. 207; Harness v. National Ins. Co., 76 Mo. App. 410; Burge v. Greenwich Ins. Co., Mo. App. 80 S. W. Rep. 342; Schloss v. Westchester Ins. Co., Ala. 37 So. Rep. 701 Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Bowdre, 67 Miss. 620, 7 So. Rep. 596; Syndicate Ins. Co. v. Catchings, 104 Ala. 176, 16 So. Rep. 46, 24 Ins. L. J. 447; Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Munger, Kans. 30 Pac. Rep. 120; Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Searles, 100 Ga. 97, 27 S. E. Rep. 779; German Ins. Co. v. Stuart, 13 Ind. App. 627, 42 N. W. Rep. 1074. RULE 36. 35 S. D. 101 Local Agent May be Clothed with Apparent Authority. In receiving and transmitting notices from the assured to the company, and in receiving communications from the company in respect thereto, and in investigating an alleged loss upon request of the company, a local agent, whatever his original authority, transacts the business for the company as its agent. While so engaged, his acts and representations are those of the company, and if his acts and conduct are inconsistent with an intention on the part of the company to insist upon a strict observance of the condition requiring the furnishing of proofs within the time prescribed, they become evidence of waiver of same. Citizens' Ins. Co. v. Stoddard, 197 Ill. 330, 64 N. E. Rep. 355, affg. 99 Ill. App. 469. RULE 37. Defects not Specifically Pointed Out to Insured Waived. If the statement or proof of loss furnished is objectionable the defect or defects must be specifically pointed out to the insured by the insurance company; if not thus pointed out they are waived;1 and if thus specifically made it operates as a waiver of all other objections, which are not, but might have been made;2 but not as a waiver of other defenses.3 1. Sutton v. American Ins. Co., 188 Pa. St. 380, 41 Atl. Rep. 537; Schmurr v. State Ins. Co., 30 Oreg. 29, 46 Pac. Rep. 363, 26 Ins. L. J. 373; First Nat. Bank v. American Central Ins. |