Farmers Mutual Fire Insurance Company of Dekalb County v. Jackman
Decision Date | 08 March 1905 |
Docket Number | 4,991 |
Parties | FARMERS MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF DEKALB COUNTY v. JACKMAN |
Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
From DeKalb Circuit Court; W. M. Brown, Special Judge.
Action by Sarah Jackman against the Farmers Mutual Fire Insurance Company of DeKalb County. From a judgment for plaintiff defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
P. V Hoffman and C. S. Smith, for appellant.
F. M Powers and Cyrus Cline, for appellee.
This was an action instituted in the DeKalb Circuit Court on the 29th day of July, 1902, to coerce payment of $ 400 on account of a policy of fire insurance issued by appellant to appellee on a certain dwelling-house situated on certain real estate in DeKalb county, Indiana, appellee owning only a life estate therein. The dwelling was totally destroyed by fire March 22, 1902.
The complaint was in three paragraphs. The first paragraph was dismissed. Briefly stated, the second paragraph avers that appellant is a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Indiana, with its principal office in DeKalb county, Indiana; that on April 3, 1880, appellee was the owner of sixty acres of real estate in said county, with a dwelling-house thereon occupied by her as a dwelling; that on said date appellant, under the name of the Farmers Mutual Fire Insurance Company of DeKalb County, Indiana, insured the appellee against loss or damage by fire or lightning to the following property, to wit: Dwelling on said land, $ 600; and specifically naming certain amounts of insurance on other specified property; that appellee paid a fee of $ 1 and a per cent. of $ 2, and received from appellant a policy--No. 192--signed by its president and secretary; that, by the terms of the policy and articles of association of appellant, appellee, by due observance of the by-laws, became a continuing member of said corporation; that on August 10, 1899, appellee sold said land to one Cyrus B. Jackman for the nominal sum of $ 2,000, and the further consideration reserved to appellee and her husband of a life estate in said lands, with the exclusive possession of same and buildings thereon, and the profits thereof; that upon the sale of said land she immediately informed the secretary of appellant that she had sold the land and under what terms and conditions, and sought his advice as to the necessity of having the policy assigned to her grantee; that she desired to make any necessary change in the policy to keep it in "full force and validity;" that said secretary "informed her that no assignment of the policy was necessary, and that no change of any nature was necessary to maintain the policy; that, under her life interest in the lands, she had a right to take out a policy on the buildings and on the contents, and the exclusive use of the buildings and the ownership of the contents, and that if there was any loss, if she was a member in good standing by having paid all assessments to the company, the loss would be paid to her;" "that she relied upon the statement of the secretary so made to her, and returned home without making any change, and continued to pay all assessments made against her by said" appellant; that on August 23, 1900, appellant came to her home and readjusted her insurance, and issued a new policy, No. 1,496; "that she was occupying said property at that time under said life tenancy, and living in the dwelling on said land, the same being the dwelling insured by" appellant; that, under the new policy, $ 400 was placed on the dwelling, and the policy duly signed by the president and secretary of appellant; that at the time of the readjustment of said insurance and the issuing of the new policy, she informed the appellant as to her rights in the land, and that it was her desire to have the policy so issued that it would be maintained in full force and effect; that she was the owner of the personal property, and held a life estate in the land, with the exclusive possession thereof; that she was again informed by the company that it was only necessary for her to keep up her assessments, and that if a loss occurred the insurance would be paid to her; that she relied upon the statements made by appellant, accepted the policy in her own name, has ever since promptly paid all assessments made against her by appellant, which assessments were received and accepted by appellant; that she has fully performed all of the conditions on her part to be performed under the terms and conditions of said policy of insurance and the by-laws of said appellant; that on March 22, 1902, said dwelling was destroyed by fire, without any fault or negligence on her part; that she was occupying said property as a dwelling at the time of its destruction; that, within ten days after the destruction of said dwelling, proofs of loss were duly made; that since the 3d day of April, 1880, until its destruction, appellee has continuously had the exclusive possession of said dwelling and occupied it as such, and that the insurance on said dwelling is due and unpaid. Judgment for $ 500 is demanded.
A copy of policy No. 192 is made an exhibit with this paragraph, and a copy of policy No. 1,496 is also made an exhibit. That part of the policy upon which this action is based, necessary for the decision of this case, is as follows: Other classes of property with insurance thereon are mentioned and described in the policy. On the back of the policy is found the following:
Next follow sections providing the duties of the various officers, the manner of electing directors, the terms of directors and duties of agents, etc. Section nineteen provides that
Section twenty-eight provides that ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Farmers' Mut. Fire Ins. Co. of De Kalb Cnty. v. Jackman
... ... 730 FARMERS' MUT. FIRE INS. CO. OF DE KALB COUNTY v. JACKMAN. No. 4,991. Appellate Court of Indiana, Division ... M. Brown, Special Judge. Action on a policy of insurance by Sarah Jackman against the Farmers' Mutual Fire Insurance Company of De Kalb County. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant ... ...