The following legal decisions are interesting and may prove useful to some readers. The first refers to “tornado insurance”—a system familiar to Westerners It decides as to the value of a reformation of policy and the non-waiving of the conditions thereof.

“On January 20, 1896, the Texas Supreme court, in the case of the German Insurance Company v. Daniels, where a tornado policy was written on a fire insurance blank,the word fire’being erased and ‘tornado’ substituted, and by agreement with the agent payment was to be made on the first of the following month; but the policy provided that it should be void until the premium was paid, while tinder a clause in a regular tornado policy the peyment could be postponed till a future day’. Neither of the parties had seen a tornado blank, and the first blank was used because the agent had no tornado blanks. The court held the evidence insufficient to warrant a reformation of the contract so that the provisions in the tornado blank would apply instead of the provisions in the fire blank as ‘o payment of p e liiums. And, as the plaintiff did not plead a waiver of file condition in the policy requiring payment of the premium before loss, he cannot be competent to prove such a waiver.”

The second has reference to the fall of a wall as the direct result of fire, and is as follows;

“In the case of Ermantraut v. Girard Fire, etc., Company, the Minnesota Supremecourt on January 31, 1896, //(•/(/, that wherea building insured‘against all direct loss or damage by fire,’ and the policy provided that if the building fell, ‘except as a result of fire,’ the insurance on the building should immediately cease; and where the partition wall of this and an adjacent building was caught and carried down by reason of a fire in the adjacent building carrying down a portion of the insured building, the fall of the insured building was ‘the result of fire’ and ‘a direct loss or damage by fire,’ although no part of it ignited or was consumed by fire.

Ten of the Detroit fireman had a narrow escape for their lives during a fire which took place on April 11, on the top floor of the five-story brick building Nos. 37 to 41 Woodbridge street and caused a loss of $20,000 to the building and $40,000 on the contents, which consisted of household goods which had been stored there. Assistant Chief Kendall and some of his men started to carry a line of hose up the stairway. They were met on the third floor by a dense volume of smoke, which rendered eight of them unconscious. Assistant Chief Kendall and one other man barely managed to struggle down the stairs and to tell of the condition in which their comrades were. The men were carried out in% nsible and taken to hospitals.

Senator Sullivan’s bill compelling telegraph and telephone companies in New York to grant their privileges to firemen and policemen on duty has been favorably reported by the assembly at Albany, N. Y.


No posts to display