Fire Ass'n of Philadelphia v. Wells
| Decision Date | 23 June 1915 |
| Citation | 84 N.J.Eq. 484,94 A. 619 |
| Parties | FIRE ASS'N OF PHILADELPHIA v. WELLS. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Appeal from Court of Chancery.
Suit by the Fire Association of Philadelphia against Thomas Wells. From decree for complainant (83 N. J. Eq. 140, 90 Atl 244), defendant appeals. Reversed and record remitted, with directions to dismiss.
Wescott & Weaver, of Camden, for appellant. Frank Smathers, of Atlantic City, for appellee.
Certain of defendant's buildings with their contents were destroyed by a fire communicated through the negligence of the servants of the Atlantic City Railroad Company. The buildings were insured by the complainant company to the extent of $2,000, and after the fire, complainant paid defendant the full amount of the insurance on the building, the replacement cost of which, according to the undisputed testimony, would be $4,575, and received from defendant an assignment of any right of action, to the extent of the payment, which he might have against any person responsible for the loss. Subsequently defendant compromised his claim against the railroad company, and was paid $5,000 for, as he testified, his "damage to goods that were destroyed that never was insured." and gave the company a release and discharge from all claims and demands which he had against it for damages for the destruction of both buildings and contents. When the settlement was made with the railroad company, it knew that complainant had paid $2,000 on account of the loss resulting from the burning of the buildings as required by its policy. The total loss suffered by defendant, on buildings and contents, exceeded $7,000. With the facts substantially as stated, the complainant filed its bill of complaint, praying that defendant be decreed to refund to it the $2,000 paid him, upon the ground that it was estopped by defendant's release to the railroad company from proceeding in his name to recover from it the unpaid damages for which the company was liable, which complainant claims it is entitled to by right of subrogation. The Vice Chancellor held that the legal effect of the release was to bar complainant of its right to proceed in defendant's name against the railroad company, and decreed that the defendant must refund the $2,000, leaving him but $5,000 on account of a loss which it is not disputed exceeded $7,000. We are of opinion that this result is not equitable, for the release was not, under the facts, a bar which estopped the complainant from asserting its right as subrogee. Both defendant and the railroad company knew, or are chargeable with knowledge, that the complainant had upon payment become entitled by subrogation to call upon the railroad company to reimburse it the money it paid the owner on its policy of insurance, and they could not defeat that right by any arrangement they might make without complainant's consent. If the loss for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Aetna Ins. Co. v. Gilchrist Bros., Inc.
... ... Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Riefolo Constr. Co., 81 N.J. 514, 523, 410 A.2d 658 (1980) ... 175, 104 A.2d 288, quoting Fire Association of Philadelphia v. Wells, 84 N.J.Eq. 484, 486, 94 A. 619 (E & A 1915) ... Pa. Mfrs. Assn. Ins. Co. v. Gov't Emp. Ins. Co., 136 N.J.Super. 491, 498-499, 347 A.2d ... ...
-
U.S. Airways, Inc. v. McCutchen
...See , e.g., Washtenaw Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Budd, 208 Mich. 483, 486–487, 175 N.W. 231, 232 (1919) ; Fire Assn. of Philadelphia v. Wells, 84 N.J.Eq. 484, 487, 94 A. 619, 621 (1915). In others, courts found those rules to comport with the applicable contract term. For example, in Svea Assura......
-
Standard Acc. Ins. Co. v. Pellecchia
...when made in fraud of the surety, even in the absence of such a provision in the surety policy. Thus, in Fire Association of Philadelphia v. Wells, 84 N.J.Eq. 484, 94 A. 619, L.R.A. 1916A, 1280 (E. & A.1915), the defendant's buildings, which were insured by the plaintiff company in the amou......
-
Home Ins. Co. v. Hertz Corp.
...Neb. 514, 73 N.W. 950; Davenport v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. (1965), 81 Nev. 361, 404 P.2d 10; Fire Association v. Wells (1915), 84 N.J.Eq. 484, 94 A. 619; Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp. v. Hooker Electrochemical Co. (1925), 240 N.Y. 37, 147 N.E. 351; Nationwide Mutual I......
-
§ 25.05 Subrogation and Waivers of Subrogation
...Fire Ins. Ass'n v. Prezioso, 93 N.J. Eq. 318, 116 A. 694 (1924); Fire Ass'n of Philadelphia v. Wells, 83 N.J. Eq. 484, 90 A. 244, rev'd 84 N.J. Eq. 484, 94 A. 619 (1915).[6] Id. [7] Safeco Insurance Co. v. Capri, 101 Nev. 429, 705 P.2d 659 (Nev. 1986).[8] See § 25.04 supra for a discussion ......