Corrigan v. Connecticut Fire Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 07 March 1877 |
| Parties | Ellen Corrigan v. Connecticut Fire Insurance Company |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Norfolk. Contract on a policy of insurance against fire issued by the defendant upon the plaintiff's house in Hyde Park. The policy contained a provision that if the premises insured "shall remain vacant or unoccupied for the space of ten days, without written notice to, and consent of the company, the policy shall be void." Trial in the Superior Court before Dewey, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows:
The house was occupied by Andrew Rooney, as tenant at will, and on April 13, 1875, the plaintiff gave a notice in writing to the tenant notifying him to quit the premises for the non-payment of rent, which notice was served upon the tenant on April 14. The next day the tenant hired another house, and removed with his family, taking one bed, a stove, and some crockery, to the house so hired, and from time to time removed the balance of his furniture. After April 14, neither Rooney nor any of his family took any meals or slept in the house previously tenanted by him, but slept and took their meals in the other house hired by him. A portion of the furniture remained in the house until two or three days before the fire, but it was not used for any other purpose and the key of the premises was retained and not handed to the plaintiff until the Sunday night before the fire, which occurred on Friday, April 30, or the morning of May 1, 1875.
The case was tried upon two issues only: 1st, whether the house remained vacant and unoccupied for the space of ten days before the fire; and 2d, what was the actual value of the house.
The plaintiff contended that the house did not remain vacant and unoccupied within the meaning of the policy, and there was a conflict of testimony as to when the tenant moved out. The judge ruled that if the jury found that the house had not been used as a dwelling-place by some one within ten days of the day of the fire, the policy would be void, and the case was submitted to the jury, on the question of occupancy within ten days, with this instruction. After the charge of the judge, as there was evidence tending to show that the tenant had not removed all his furniture ten days before the fire, the foreman of the jury asked the judge whether the fact that the tenant's furniture, or some of it, remained in the house, and the key had not been...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Connecticut Fire Ins. Co. v. Buchanan
... ... Limburg v. German Fire Ins. Co., 90 Iowa, 709, 57 ... N.W. 626, 23 L.R.A. 99, 48 Am.St.Rep. 468; Feshe v ... Council Bluffs Ins. Co., 74 Iowa, 676; 39 N.W. 87; ... Ashworth v. Builders' Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 112 ... Mass. 422, 17 Am.Rep. 117; Corrigan v. Connecticut Fire ... Ins. Co., 122 Mass. 298; Herrman v, Adriatic Fire Ins ... Co., 85 N.Y. 162, 39 Am.Rep. 644; Halpin v. Phoenix Ins ... Co., 118 N.Y. 165, 174, 23 N.E. 482; Halpin v. Aetna ... Fire Ins. Co., 120 N.Y. 70, 23 N.E. 988; Cook v ... Continental Ins. Co., 70 Mo. 610, ... ...
-
Stubbs v. Boston & Northern Street R. Co.
... ... he was using due care. Corrigan v. Connecticut Fire Ins ... Co., 122 Mass. 298, 300. Urquhart v. Smith & ... ...
-
American Fire Ins. Co. v. Brighton Cotton Manuf'g Co.
...78 Ill. 167;Reid v. Insurance Co., 90 N. Y. 382;Whitney v. Insurance Co., 9 Hun, 39: Insurance Co. v. Foster, 92 Ill. 334;Corrigan v. Insurance Co., 122 Mass. 298;Litch v. Insurance Co., 136 Mass. 491;Sleeper v. Insurance Co., 5 Ins. Law J. 538; Insurance Co. v. Burns, Id. 69; Dennison v. I......
-
Ohio Farmers' Ins. Co. v. Vogel
...was absolute. Citing Harrison v. City Ins. Co., 9 Allen, 231, 85 Am. Dec. 751;Keith v. Queen Ins. Co., 10 Allen, 228;Corrigan v. Conn. F. Ins. Co., 122 Mass. 298. In Continental, etc., Co. v. Kyle, 124 Ind. 132, 24 N. E. 727, 9 L. R. A. 81, 19 Am. St. Rep. 77, the policy of insurance was up......