Cooper v. German-American Insurance Company of New York
| Decision Date | 27 October 1905 |
| Docket Number | 14,456 - (56) |
| Citation | 104 N.W. 687,96 Minn. 81 |
| Parties | W.I. COOPER v. GERMAN-AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Action in the district court for Clay county to recover $1,000 upon a fire insurance policy. Defendant denied liability on the ground that, without its consent, the insured property had been removed to a more hazardous location. The case was tried before Dibell, J., and a jury which rendered a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $965.25. From an order denying a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial, defendant appealed. Affirmed.
Change of Location.
The duly authorized agent of a fire insurance company, having power to consent to the removal of the location of insured property and to transfer the policy, may by oral agreement consent to such removal and make such transfer, and if such agreement is made the policy does not become void but continues in force. The fact that the rate of insurance is greater at the new location does not relieve the obligations of the company under the policy, provided the insured agrees and holds himself in readiness to pay the additional premium. The duty is upon the agent to ascertain what the increased rate is and make demand upon the insured therefor.
M. L Countryman, Morton Barrows and Edwin Adams, for appellant.
C. A Nye and M. R. Tyler, for respondent.
The question upon this appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to justify the jury in finding that the company consented to the change in location of certain insured goods and agreed to transfer the policy, and whether, being oral, such agreement was binding on the company.
The policy contained a provision that it should be void
If the assured now has or shall hereafter make any other insurance on the said property without the assent of the company, or if without such assent the property shall be removed, * * * or if without such assent the situation or circumstances affecting the risk, shall, by or with the knowledge, advice, agency, or consent of the insured, be so altered as to cause an increase of such risks.
Plaintiff's testimony was to the effect that, during the time he was engaged in removing the property from the place where it had been insured to another location three or four blocks away in the same village, he had a conversation with the local agent of defendant company, informing him that he was moving his goods, and to what place, and requesting a transfer of his policy; that the agent answered he would attend to it, but that there would be a difference in the premium, to which plaintiff replied he would pay the difference; and that the agent promised to let him know what it was. The goods were moved to the new place, where the rate of insurance was much higher. Plaintiff did not deliver his policy into the...
To continue reading
Request your trial