Hamilton v. Home Ins Co
Decision Date | 15 December 1890 |
Citation | 137 U.S. 370,11 S.Ct. 133,34 L.Ed. 708 |
Parties | HAMILTON v. HOME INS. CO |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
This was an action, brought June 26, 1886, upon a policyof insurance, numbered 3,190, by which the Home Insurance Company of New York insured Robert Hamilton for one year from February 23, 1886, on a stock of tobacco in his warehouse at 413 and 415 Madison street in Covington in the state of Kentucky, against loss or damage by fire to the amount of $5,000, 'to be paid sixty days after due notice and proofs of the same shall have been made by the assured and received at the office of the company in New York.' The policy, after providing that it case of loss the assured should forth with give notice, and as soon afterwards as possible furnish proofs of loss, with a magistrate's certificate, submit to examination on oath, and produce books and vouchers and copies of lost books and invoices, further provided, among other things, as follows: 'But provided, in case differences shall arise touching any loss or damage, after proof thereof has been received in due form, the matter shall, at the written request of either party, by submitted to impartial arbitrators, whose award in writing shall be binding on the parties as to the amount of such loss or damage, but shall not decide the liability of the company under this policy.' 'And it is hereby understood and agreed by and between this company and the assured that this policy is made and accepted in reference to the foregoing terms and conditions, and to the classes of hazards and memoranda printed on the back of this policy, which are hereby declared to be a part of this contract, and are to be used and resorted to in order to determine the rights and obligations of the parties hereto in all cases not herein otherwise specially provided for in writing.' The answer admitted the execution of the policy, and notice of loss; put in issue the amount of loss; denied that the plaintiff ever delivered due proofs of loss, or had performed the conditions of the policy on his part; and, after reciting the substance of the provisions above quoted, alleged as follows: The plaintiff filed a replication, denying these allegations of the answer. At the trial, the plaintiff introduced evidence tending to prove a loss or damage by fire on April 16, 1886, to the amount of the insurance, and the delivery of proofs of loss in accordance with the policy, and put in evidence a policy of the Liverpool, London & Globe Insurance Company on the same property; the defendant introduced evidence tending to prove that the amount of loss or damage was less; and there was put in evidence a correspondence in writing between the parties or their authorized agents at Cincinnati, the material parts of which were as follows:
April 26, 1886. Plaintiff to defendant:
April 27, 1886. Defendant to plaintiff: 'Received of Robert Hamilton papers purporting to be proofs of loss under Home Insurance policy No. 3,190.'
April 28, 1886. Defendant and other insurance companies to plaintiff:
April 29, 1886. Plaintiff's counsel to defendant and other insurance companies: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Lincoln Mills of Ala. v. Textile Workers Union
...provides for the determination of liability. If executory, a breach will support an action for damages. Hamilton v. Home Ins. Co., 137 U.S. 370, 385-386, 11 S.Ct. 133, 34 L.Ed. 708, 713 * * * If executed — that is, if the award has been made — effect will be given to the award in any approp......
-
Robert Lawrence Company v. Devonshire Fabrics, Inc.
...the contract, although such treatment generally meant the agreement was being deprived of its efficacy. Hamilton v. Home Insurance Co., 1890, 137 U.S. 370, 11 S.Ct. 133, 34 L.Ed. 708; Gatliff Coal Co. v. Cox, 6 Cir., 1944, 142 F.2d 876; United States Asphalt Refining Co. v. Trinidad Lake Pe......
-
Mecartney v. Guardian Trust Company
... ... clients who were unable to make such payments. It was ... understood further that plaintiff's home and office were ... in Chicago, where he and his assistants would do the greater ... part of his briefing and office work, and he necessarily ... indicates an intention to make it a condition precedent ... [ Smith v. Preferred Masonic Mut. Acc. Assn., 51 F ... 520, l. c. 522; Hamilton v. Ins. Co., 137 U.S. 370, ... 34 L.Ed. 708, 11 S.Ct. 133; Read v. State Ins. Co., ... 64 Am. St. 180, 103 Iowa 307, 72 N.W. 665; Chadwick v ... ...
-
Kahn v. Traders Insurance Company
...U.S. 712; Ins. Co. v. Wilson, 45 Kan. 250.) Otherwise an agreement for arbitration is a collateral agreement only. (Hamilton v. Ins. Co., 137 U.S. 370.) Defendant must show that it made an effort to secure arbitration. (Vangindertaelen v. Ins. Co., 82 Wis. 112; Abbott's Trial Br. on Pl., 18......