Co., 58 Minn. 492, 60 N. W. Rep. 345, 24 Ins. L. J. 55; Rockford Ins. Co. v. Winfield, 57 Kans. 576, 47 Pac. Rep. 511; German Ins. Co. v. Gray, 43 Kans. 497, 23 Pac. Rep. 637; Faulkner v. Manchester Assur. Co., 171 Mass. 349, 50 N. E. Rep. 529; Virginia F. & M. Ins. Co. v. Goode, 95 Va. 762, 30 S. E. Rep. 370; Karelsen v. Sun Fire Office, 45 Hun. 144, affd., 122 N. Y. 545; Merchants' Ins. Co. v. Reichman (Tex.), 40 S. W. Rep. 831; Firemen's Ins. Co. v. Floss, 67 Md. 403; Brock v. Des Moines Ins. Co., 106 Iowa, 30, 75 N. W. Rep. 683, 27 Ins. L. J. 893; Liverpool, L. & G. Ins. Co. r. Sorsby, 60 Miss. 302; Weed v. Hamburg-Bremen Ins. Co., 133 N. Y. 394, 31 N. E. Rep. 231; German Ins. Co. v. Gibson, 53 Ark. 494; Hartford Ins. Co. v. Meyer, 30 Nebr. 135, 46 N. W. Rep. 292; Argall. Insurance Co., 84 N. C. 355; Pratt v. New York Central Ins. Co., 55 N. Y. 505; Hamilton v. Connecticut Ins. Co., 46 Fed. Rep. 42; Titus v. Glens Falls Ins. Co., 81 N. Y. 410; Badger v. Glens Falls Ins. Co., 49 Wis. 389; Planters' Ins. Co. v. Engle, 52 Md. 468; Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Tucker, 92 Ill. 64; State Ins. Co. r. Maackens, 9 Vroom (N. J.), 564. And see Cummer Lumber Co. v. Assoc. Mfrs. Ins. Co., 67 App. Div. 151, 73 N. Y. Supp. 668, affd., 173 N. Y. 633, without opinion; Billmyer. Hamburg-Bremen Ins. Co., W. Va. 49 S. E. Rep. 901; Vesey v. Commercial Union Assur. Co., . S. D. 101 N. W. Rep. 1074.

2. Levine v. Lancashire Ins. Co., 66 Minn. 138, 68 N. W. Rep. 855, 26 Ins. L. J. 36; Western Home Ins. Co. v. Richardson, 40 Nebr. 1, 58 N. W. Rep. 597, 23 Ins. L. J. 501; Kuznik v. Orient Ins. Co., 73 Ill. App. 201; Robinson v. Palatine Ins. Co., N. M. 66 Pac. Rep. 535; Enos v. St. Paul Ins. Co., 4 S. D. 639, 57 N. W. Rep. 919, 23 Ins. L. J. 258; Fire Ins. Co. v. Felrath, 77 Ala. 194; Hanover Ins. Co. v. Lewis, 28 Fla. 209, 10 So. Rep. 297; Craighton v. Agricultural Ins. Co., 39 Hun, 319.

3. Armstrong . Agricultural Ins. Co., 130 N. Y. 560, 29 N. E. Rep. 991.

RULE 38.

Objections Must be Made Promptly.

The insurance company should make its objections, if any, to the statement or proof furnished, promptly, as otherwise delay may be evidence of waiver;1 for instance, delay of twenty-three days2 may be evidence of waiver; or thirty days and over, and even much less delay, may be evidence of waiver when the

3

t

company, having received the statement or proof of loss with opportunity to object before expiration of the prescribed time, omits to do so until after.*

1. Welsh v. London Assur. Co., 151 Pa. St. 607, 25 Atl. Rep. 142, 22 Ins. L. J. 94; Cummins v. German-American Ins. Co., 197 Pa. St. 61, 46 Atl. Rep. 902; De Witt v. Agricultural Ins. Co., 157 N. Y. 353, 51 N. E. Rep. 977; Home Ins. Co. v. Hammong, 44 Nebr. 566, 62 N. W. Rep. 883, 24 Ins. L. J. 493; Vergeront v. German Ins. Co., 86 Wis. 425, 56 N. W. Rep. 1096, 23 Ins. L. J. 236; Alston v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 100 Ga. 287, 27 S. E. Rep. 981, 27 Ins. L. J. 77; Dyer v. Des Moines Ins. Co., 103 Iowa, 524, 72 N. W. Rep. 68; Probst v. American Central Ins. Co., 64 Mo. App. 408; Georgia Home Ins. Co. v. Goode, 95 Va. 751, 30 S. E. Rep. 366; Planters' Ins. Co. r. Deford, 38 Md. 382, 404; Patterson v. Triumph Ins. Co., 64 Me. 500; Swan v. Liverpool, L. & G. Ins. Co., 52 Miss. 704; Mercantile Ins. Co. v. Holthouse, 43 Mich. 423; Firemen's Ins. Co. v. Floss, 67 Md. 403; Liverpool, L. & G. Ins. Co. v. Sorsby, 60 Miss. 302; German Ins. Co. v. Gray, 43 Kans. 497, 23 Pac. Rep. 637; Glazer v. Home Ins. Co., Misc. N. Y. Supp. 426.

90

2. Davis v. Grand Rapids Ins. Co., 15 Misc. 263, 36 N. Y. Supp. 792, affd. without opinion, 157 N. Y. 685; Keeney v. Home Ins. Co., 71 N. Y. 396; Jones v. Howard Ins. Co., 117 N. Y. 103, 22 N. E. Rep. 578; Capital Ins. Co. r. Wallace, 48 Kans. 400, 29 Pac. Rep. 755.

3. German Ins. Co. v. Hall, 1 Kans. App. 43, 41 Pac. Rep. 69; Carpenter v. Allemania Ins. Co., 156 Pa. St. 37, 26 Atl. Rep. 781, 22 Ins. L. J. 634; Sutton v. American Ins. Co., 188 Pa. St. 380, 41 Atl. Rep. 537; Dakin v. Liverpool, L. & G. Ins. Co., 13 Hun, 122.

4. Dautel v. Pennsylvania Ins. Co., 65 Mo. App. 44; Angier v. Western Assur. Co., 10 S. D. 82, 71 N. W. Rep. 761; Deland v. Ætna Ins. Co., 68 Mo. App. 277.

RULE 39.

Insured Must Have Opportunity to Supply or Remedy Defects. The objections, if any, to a statement or proof of loss should be pointed out within reasonable time so

that the assured can have opportunity to supply or remedy them within limited time, otherwise the company's delay may be evidence of waiver;1 if assured has ample opportunity to furnish the statement required, there is no waiver.2

1. Messner v. Niagara Ins. Co., 24 App. Div. 241, 48 N. Y. Supp. 478; Moyer v. Sun Ins. Co., 176 Pa. St. 579, 35 Atl. Rep. 221; Hibernia Ins. Co. v. Meyer, 10 Vroom (N. J.), 482; Ben Franklin Ins. Co. v. Flynn, 98 Pa. St. 628; Keeney v. Home Ins. Co., 71 N. Y. 396; Firemen's Ins. Co. v. Crandall, 33 Ala. 9; Bartlett v. Union Ins. Co., 46 Me. 500; Mercantile Ins. Co. v. Holthouse, 43 Mich. 423, 5 N. W. Rep. 642.

2. Riker v. Insurance Co. N. A., 90 App. Div. 391, 85 N. Y. Supp. 546.

RULE 40.

Insured Must Have Reasonable Time to Comply with Objections to Proofs.

When the company objects and demands further statement or proof, the assured has a reasonable time to comply therewith even although when furnished the limited or prescribed time (sixty days) has expired.

Cummins v. German-American Ins. Co., 192 Pa. St. 359, 43 Atl. Rep. 1016. And see St. John v. German-American Ins. Co., Mo. App. 82 S. W. Rep. 543.

RULE 41.

Company not Obliged to Return Proofs to Make Objections Effective.

The insurance company is not obliged to return papers purporting to be proofs to make its objections to same as such effective; rejection and objection by notice is sufficient, or return may be made with notice of rejection and objection as the company may determine; but should return them to assured for correction when so requested.2

1. German-American Ins. Co. v. Hocking, 115 Pa. St. 398, 406.

2. Turley v. Insurance Co. of N. A., 25 Wend. 375; Findeisen v. Metropole Ins. Co., 57 Vt. 520.

RULE 42.

Waiver of Written Extension of Time.

The clause requiring written extension of time to furnish proofs may be waived.

Baumgartel v. Providence-Washington Ins. Co., 61 Hun, 118, 15 N. Y. Supp. 573, revd., 136 Ñ. Y. 547, but on another question. It was held in Missouri Pac. Ry. Co. v. Western Assur. Co., 129 Fed. Rep. 610 (U. S. Cir.), that a waiver of proofs must be in writing, but this case seems to be substantially overruled by Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Kerr, 129 Fed. Rep. 723, C. C. A.

See Waiver."

RULE 43.

Company Under no Obligation to Furnish Blanks

Construed as Waiver.

Refusal not

The insurance company is under no obligation to furnish blank proofs of loss, and its mere refusal to do so cannot be construed as a denial of liability or as a waiver of proofs;1 but duty to furnish such blanks may be imposed by statute;2 and failure of the company to comply with the request for blanks operates as a waiver.3

1. Continental Ins. Co. v. Dornian, 125 Ind. 189, 25 N. E. Rep. 213; Palmer v. Factors' Ins. Co., 33 La. Ann. 1336; Birmingham v. Farmers' Ins. Co., 67 Barb. 595; Fire Assoc. v. Masterson, Tex. Civ. App. 61 S. W. Rep. 962.

2. Brounfield v. Mercantile Ins. Co., 84 Mo. App. 134.

3. Myer v. Insurance Co. of N. A., 73 Mo. App. 166; Branigan v. Jeffersou Ins. Co., 102 Mo. App. 70, 76 S. W. Rep. 643.

RULE 44.

Waiver by Refusal to Adjust or Pay, Company Having the Policy. Where company has or obtains possession of the policy, refusal to adjust or pay waives proofs within certain time.

Norwich Union Ins. Soc. v. Girton, 124 Ind. 217, 24 N. E. Rep. 984.

RULE 45.

Reference to Policy not Sufficient Objection.

Where company receives a statement of a loss within proper time, with advice from the assured that he does not have access to the policy, which is not in his possession, and requesting, if not satisfactory, information as to what he should do, referring the assured to the policy is not a sufficient objection, and the company waives the condition both as to time and form. Farmers' Ins. Co. v. Baker, 94 Md.. 545, 51 Atl. Rep. 184. RULE 46.

Effect of Refusal to Deliver Policy on Parol Contract. Where the assured depends upon a parol contract of insurance, and the company refuses to issue or deliver the policy, such refusal amounts to a denial of liability, and as a waiver of proofs;' but such denial and refusal by the local agent, having no authority to waive proofs, does not amount to such waiver.2

1. Baile v. St. Joseph Ins. Co., 73 Mo. 371; Western Assur. Co. v. McAlpin, 23 Ind. App. 221.

2. Hicks v. British-American Ins. Co., 162 N. Y. 284, 56 N. E. Rep. 743.

RULE 47.

Effect of Adjustment or Agreement as to Amount of Loss.

An adjustment or agreement as to amount of the loss is evidence of waiver of notice and proofs of loss.

Gerhart v. Northern Assur. Co., 86 Mo. App. 596.

Proofs may notwithstanding be required as they include other particulars. See Rule 1. It is customary to furnish them as evidence of agreement as to amount, and if not otherwise specially agreed, they are required to fix time for payment. See Payment of the Loss, Rules 1 and 3.