Baldwin v. State Insurance Co.

• Decision Date: 23 March 1883
• Citation: 15 N.W. 300,60 Iowa 497
• Parties: BALDWIN ET AL. v. STATE INSURANCE COMPANY
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

15 N.W. 300

60 Iowa 497

BALDWIN ET AL. v. STATE INSURANCE COMPANY

Supreme Court of Iowa, Council Bluffs

March 23, 1883

Appeal from Van Buren District Court.

ACTION in equity to reform a policy of fire insurance, and enforce payment for a loss alleged to have occurred under it. The building which the policy purports to cover is described as being on the southeast quarter of section 2, township 70, Van Buren county. The building destroyed was on the southwest quarter of the section. The policy ran to the plaintiff, W E. Baldwin. The building destroyed was owned, both at the time of the issuance of the policy and at the time of the loss, solely by the plaintiff, E. T. Baldwin. The plaintiffs ask that the policy "be reformed so as to insure and cover the property and interest of the plaintiff, E. T Baldwin", and "that the plaintiffs, or such one of them as may be entitled thereto, have judgment." The court dismissed the plaintiffs' petition and they appeal.

AFFIRMED.

Stiles & Beaman, for appellants.

Wright Cummins & Wright, for appellee.

OPINION

ADAMS, J.

Whether the plaintiffs were entitled to a reformation of the policy, so far as the description of the property is concerned, we need not determine. The case will turn upon other questions. It appears to us that insuperable obstacles stand in the way of any recovery by either of the plaintiffs, and would, if the property destroyed had been described in the policy as the property insured.

We proceed to inquire, first, whether E. T. Baldwin can recover. He certainly cannot, unless by a reformation of the policy he can be made a party to it. Now, perhaps, it would be sufficient to say that he does not specifically ask for such reformation. He does not, indeed, show with any precision upon what theory he expects to recover.

But waiving this objection, we have still to determine whether the facts are such as to entitle him, by reformation of the policy, to be made a party to it. If he contracted for the insurance, and the intention was to insert his name in the policy as the insured, and by mistake the name of W. E Baldwin was inserted, the way would seem to be clear to reform the policy by the insertion of E. T. Baldwin's name as the insured, in the place of that of W. E. Baldwin, and give E. T. Baldwin a right of recovery. But the evidence shows conclusively that W. E. Baldwin contracted for the insurance, and paid for it, and that his name was purposely inserted in the policy as the insured. There never was any understanding on the part of any one that E. T. Baldwin's name was to be inserted in the policy. The policy was drawn precisely as the parties to it intended it should be, and, so far as E. T. Baldwin had any thing to say about it, precisely as he intended it should be. The facts were, as shown conclusively by the evidence, that E. T. Baldwin was financially embarrassed, and apprehended that, if the policy ran to him, his creditors, in case of...