« PreviousContinue »
Wolf v. Goodhue Ins. Co., 282.
v. Howard Ins. Co., 105.
v. Sun Ins. Co., 30.
v. Cascade Ins. Co., 471, 473.
v. Poughkeepsie Ins. Co., 447. Woodbury Bank v. Charter Oak Ins. Co., 387, 396. Woodruff v. Des Moines Ins. Co., 349.
v. Imperial Ins. Co., 109, 419.
v. Hartford Ins. Co., 15, 249.
v. Susquehanna Ins. Co., 189. Wunderlich v. Chicago N. R. Co., 362, 369.
v. Palatine Ins. Co., 27. Wyman v. Prosser, 18.
v. Wyman, 30. Wynkoop v. Niagara Ins. Co., 186, 298, 303. Wytheville Ins. Co. v. Stultz, 420.
Y. Yendel v. Western Assur, Co., 154, 157. Yoch v. Home Mut. Ins. Co., 67, 71. Yonkers Ins. Co. v. Hoffman, 61. Yost v. Dwelling-House Ins. Co., 140, 141, 188. Young v. Ohio Farmers’ Ins. Co., 227, 235.
v. St. Paul F. & M. Ins. Co., 435.
v. Iowa State Ins. Co., 298, 301.
Valid CONTRACT IN EVENT OF FIRE AND AS AFFECTED BY ConstrucTION AND WAIVER, OR ESTOPPEL, AND THE ADJUSTMENT OF LOSSES AND Claims
THEREUNDER, REDUCED TO Rules.
2. Duty to give notice of loss.
erty, put in order, inventory, and exhibit remains.
TITLE I. Duty to Save and Preserve Property. RULE 1. Duty to save and preserve property imposed by con
tract. 2. Standard of care. 3. Interference by insured. 4. Duty to save life superior. 5. Effect of failure to perform duty — Burden of proof
Must be in power of assured.
Duty to Save and Preserve Property Imposed by Contract.
The company shall not be liable for loss caused by neglect of the insured to use all reasonable means to save and preserve the property at and after a fire, or when the property is endangered by fire in neighboring premises.
The duty to save and preserve is imposed, by above terms, in the standard form of policy prescribed in: New York,
“If the insured property shall be exposed to loss or damage by fire, the insured shall make all reasonable exertions to save and protect the same.”
In the States where no standard form is prescribed, and other than those above named, the New York standard form is in general use.
Standard of Care.
The standard of care is not fixed either by contract or by law, but that degree of care, caution, or effort is incumbent upon the assured which might reasonably be expected of an ordinarily prudent person under like circumstances and conditions.
Price v. Patrons' Home Protection Co., 77 Mo. App. 236.
* While the statute under which the legislature of Pennsylvania authorized the adoption of the standard form has been held by the Supreme Court of that State to be unconstitutional and void, the New York standard form continues in general use in that State. O'Neill v. American Ins. Co., 166 Pa. St. 72, 30 Atl. Rep. 943. See “ Construction," Rule 1.
Interference by Assured. Interference by the assured with efforts of others to extinguish the fire and save property, constitutes a violation of his duty to“ save and preserve.'
Phænix Ins. Co. v. Mills, 77 Ill. App. 546.
Duty to Save Life Superior. The duty of caring for the members of assured's family or to save life is superior to that imposed by contract to save and preserve property, and when the proper performance of the former duty prevents attention to the latter, assured is not chargeable with neglect to save and preserve property.
Raymond v. Farmers' Ins. Co., 114 Mich. 386, 72 N. W. Rep. 254; Citizens' Ins. Co. v. Bland, 39 S. W. Rep. 825, 26 Ins. L. J. (Ky.) €15.
Rffect of Failure to Perform Duty Burden of Proof - Must
be in Power of Assured. Failure to perform the duty to save and preserve property does not of itself cause a forfeiture of the policy; the consequence is that the assured cannot recover to extent of loss or damage caused by his neglect to use all reasonable means to save and preserve; it is ordinarily a question of fact, and the burden of establishing such a defense rests upon the insurance company;' such duty does not exist unless in the power of assured to act in saving or preserving?
1. Wolters v. Western Assurance Co., 95 Wis. 265, 70 N. W. Rep. 62; Ellsworth v. Ætna Ins. Co., 89 N. Y. 186; Fletcher v. German-American Ins. Co., 79 Minn. 338, 82 N. W. Rep. 647; German-American Ins. Co. v. Brown, Ark. 87 S. W. Rep. 135.
2. Aurora Ins. Co. v. Johnson, 46 Ind. 316, 326.
Duty to Give Notice of Loss. RULE 1. Duty of insured to give notice of loss imposed by
contract. 2. No ice required when damage by lightning or cyclone. 3. Notice required by a statute. 4. Meaning of word“ immediate "-- As a question of
fact or law. 5. Proof of loss as notice of loss. 6. Notice, by whom given. 7. Notice by mail. 8. Notice, when not immediate. 9. Waiver of notice. 10. Authority of local agent - Waiver. 11. Death of insured does not dispense with necessity of notice.
RULE 1. *'7 of Insured to Give Notice of Loss Imposed by Contract.
Cre occur the insured shall give immediate notice any loss thereby in writing to the insurance comrny.
mhis duty is imposed by above terms in the standard form of policy prescribed in: New York,
The standard form in New Hampshire requires notice from the insured “in writing, to the secretary, a director, or an agent of the company, within thirty days."
In South Dakota “ the insured shall promptly give notice” of loss or damage.
Sce note to “ Duty to Save and Preserve Property,” Rule 1,