Page images
PDF
EPUB

The standard form of policy prescribed in:
Maine,

New Hampshire,
Massachusetts,

South Dakota,
Minnesota,
insures “ against loss or damage by fire.”

In the States where no standard form is prescribed, and other than those above named, the New York standard form is in general use.

RULE 2.

Meaning of Direct Loss or Damage by Fire - Proximate Cause.

The words “direct loss or damage by fire” mean loss or damage occurring directly from fire as the destroying agency, in contradiction to the remoteness of fire as such agency;' but the question as to fire being the proximate cause or not is one of fact to be determined by a jury.

1. California Ins. Co. v. Union Compress Co., 133 U. S. 387, 10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 365; Ermentraut v. Girard Ins. Co., 63 Minn. 305, 65 N. W. Rep. 635, 25 Ins. L. J. 81; Lynn Gas Co. v. Meriden Ins. Co., 158 Mass. 570, 577.

2. N. Y. & Boston Express Co. v. Traders & Mechanics' Ins. Co., 132 Mass. 377; s. c., 135 Mass. 221.

RULE 3

What is Proximate Cause.

the one

The proximate cause is the efficient cause that necessarily sets the other causes in operation. The causes that are merely incidental or instruments of a superior or a controlling agency are not the proximate causes and the responsible ones, though they may be nearer in time to the result. It is only when the causes are independent of each other that the nearest is of course to be charged with the disaster.

Ætna Ins. Co. v. Boon, 95 U. S. 117, 130; Lynn Gas Co. 1'. Meriden Ins. Co., 158 Mass. 575. And see Conner v. Manchester Assur. Co., 130 Fed. Rep. 743, C. C. A.

RULE 4.

Damage and Expense Caused in Removing Property when En

dangered by Fire. The damage and expense caused in properly performing the duty required in saving or preserving property insured from an apparent imminent destruction by fire are proper to be claimed as against the insurance company;' and this is governed not by the result but by the circumstances as they reasonably appeared to the parties at the time. The obligation to pay such damage is distinctly recognized also in the apportionment clause in the policy.

1. White v. Republic Ins. Co., 57 Me. 91; Case v. Hartford ins. Co., 13 Ill. 676. And see Liebner v. Liverpool, L. & G. Ins. Co., 6 Bush (Ky.), 639; Brady v. Northwestern Ins. Co., 11 Mich. 425; Talamon v. Home Mut. Ins. Co., 16 La. Ann. 426; Insurance Co. of N. A. v. Leader, Ga. 48 S. E. Rep. 972.

2. Balestraci v. Firemen's Ins. Co., 34 La. Ann. 844. 3. See “ Apportionment.”

RULE 5.

Fall of Wall After Fire.

If the wall of a building, being weakened by heavy rains, falls twenty-five days after the fire, the fall of the wall cannot be considered the direct result of the fire.

Cuesta v. Royal Ins. Co., 98 Ga. 720, 27 S. E. Rep. 172.

RULE 6.

What Loss or Damage by Fire Includes.

Loss or damage by fire includes not merely the injury done by the combustion, heat, smoke, and expan

3

sive effects of the fire, but also by any falling, displacement, or change of quality thereby caused, as well as the injury done by water or chemicals in extinguishing fire, or in moving goods, or trampling on them, or blowing up building in a bona fide attempt to extinguish or stay the fire; the company is liable for any loss which is the proximate result of a fire, although fire does not itself extend to place where damage is done;" actual ignition or combustion is not necessary,2 but the word “fire” cannot be construed to mean heat of a degree too low to cause ignition. Damage caused by a fire engine on its way to a fire is not caused by the fire.

1. Heuer v. Westchester Ins. Co., 44 Ill. App. 429; Cohn v. National Ins. Co., 96 Mo. App. 315, 70 S. W. Rep. 259; John Davis & Co. v. Insurance Co. of N. A., 115 Mich. 382, 73 N. W. Rep. 393, 27 Ins. L. J. 184; Ermentraut v. Girard F. & M. Ins. Co., 63 Minn. 305, 65 N. W. Rep. 635, 25 Ins. L. J. 81; New York & Boston Express Co. v. Traders’ Ins. Co., 132 Mass. 377; Lymn Gas & Electric Co. v. Meriden Ins. Co., 158 Mass. 570, 33 N. E. Rer. 690.

2. Ermentraut v. Girard Ins. Co., 63 Minn. 305; Transatlantic Ins. Co. v. Dorsey, 56 Md. 70; Ballerstraci v. Firemen's Ins. Co., 34 La. Ann. 844.

3. Gibbons v. German Ins. Co., 30 Ill. App. 263.
4. Foster v. Fidelity Ins. Co., 24 Pa. Supr. Ct. 585.

[merged small][ocr errors]

Damage by smoke from soot in a chimney into which a pipe of a stove enters, and ignited by a fire from the stove, is a loss or damage by fire, but not where the smoke and soot are caused by a lamp flaring up above its chimney; loss caused by escaping steam is not a loss by fire;3 nor is damage to interior of a boiler, due to overheating from lack of water, loss by fire;- nor is damage caused by smoke and soot from a defective stovepipe a loss by fire.

1. Way v. Abington Ins. Co., 166 Mass. 67, 43 N. E. Rep. 1032, 25 Ins. L. J. 702. And see Willow Grove Co. v. Planters' Ins. Co., 77 Md. 532.

2. Samuels v. Continental Ins. Co., 2 Pa. Dist. R. 397; Fitzgerald v. German-American Ins. Co., 30 Misc. 72, 60 N. Y. Supp. 824.

3. Gibbons v. German Ins. Co., 30 Ill. App. 263.

4. American Towing Co. v. German Ins. Co., 74 Md. 25, 21 Atl. Rep. 553.

5. Cannon v. Phænix Ins. Co., 110 Ga. 563, 35 S. E. Rep. 775.

RULE 8.

Destruction or Damage Caused by Insured After Fire.

Where insured himself after the fire destroys or injures the goods or property, such loss or damage is not by the fire.

Dohman Co. v. Niagara Ins. Co., 96 Wis. 38, 71 N. W. Rep. 69, 27 Ins. L. J. 357.

TITLE IV.

Amount of Loss or Damage.

RULE 1. Limitation upon amount of loss or damage as imposed

by contract.
2. Amount of policy not the measure of damage.
3. Construction of doubtful language favors indemnity.
4. Damage to personal property.
5. Effect of limitation to cost of repairing or replacing.
6. Cost of repairing or replacing not necessarily a rule of

damage in all cases.
7. Effect of making policy a valued one - Profits.

-
8. Profits to be recoverable must be specifically insured.
9. Meaning of cash value — Manufacturers.
10. Manufacturer of machines.
11. Cash value — Market value.
12. Auction price as evidence.

RULE 13. Allowance for depreciation - Burden of proof.

14. Amount paid for assignment of policy not evidence.
15. When property is destroyed.
16. Assured competent witness.
17. Two-thirds, three-fourths, and coinsurance clauses —

Statutes.
18. Three-fourths clause — Valued-policy statute.
19. Household furniture and wearing apparel.
20. Market value of stocks of merchandise - Evidence.
21. Loss of stock of merchandise, how estimated.
22. Inventory of goods as evidence.
23. Estimate of loss may be based on original bills when

no books and no inventory. 24. Inventory and books must be verified as correct. 25. Property in bonded warehouse. 26. Efficiency of machines destroyed not affected by those

not destroyed. 27. Evidence of value as limited by time - Property hav

ing no market value. 28. Machine destroyed obtainable from patentee and only

one source. 29. Patterns have no market value. 30. Loss payable to third party: 31. Insurance of a tenant. 32. Reinsurance payable pro rata. 33. Cost of building not proper measure of damage. 34. When insurable interest insured extends to whole value

of building. 35. When interest is limited. 36. Limitation of cost of repairing or replacing as applied

to buildings — Effect of local statutes. 37. Cash value as applied to a building. 38. Assured not limited to relative value of building for

purpose of removal. 39. Partial loss to building — Effect of building laws. 40. Measure of damage when building partially destroyed. 41. Opinions of witness. 42. Effect of statute fixing value and measure of damage. 43. Statute fixing amount of loss, makes it a liquidated

demand. 44. Company cannot evade statute fixing amount of loss. 45. Burden of proof of modification under statute fixing

amount of loss.

« PreviousContinue »