General Service Corporation v. Allhoff Bros.
| Decision Date | 07 May 1940 |
| Docket Number | No. 25468.,25468. |
| Citation | 139 S.W.2d 1062 |
| Parties | GENERAL SERVICE CORPORATION v. ALLHOFF BROS., Inc. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, St. Louis County; John J. Wolfe, Judge.
"Not to be reported in State Reports."
Action by the General Service Corporation, attorney in fact for the General Indemnity Exchange, against Allhoff Bros., Inc., to recover compensation alleged to be due under an insurance exchange contract. From a judgment for the plaintiff, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Callahan & Callahan and John P. Griffin, all of St. Louis, for appellant.
Henry C. Stoll, of St. Louis, for respondent.
SUTTON, Commissioner.
Plaintiff is a corporation engaged in the business of writing and exchanging insurance policies on the reciprocal or inter-insurance plan as attorney in fact for and on behalf of the several subscribers of the General Indemnity Exchange. On August 12, 1938, defendant executed to plaintiff a contract appointing the plaintiff as its attorney in fact for the purpose of executing and exchanging contracts of insurance with the several subscribers of said exchange. The contract, which is signed by F. H. Allhoff as president of defendant, provides as follows: "The compensation of my attorney shall be thirty per cent of the sums stipulated in each contract, to be deposited by me for the exchange of insurance, whether paid or due."
On August 15, 1938, pursuant to said contract, plaintiff executed and delivered to defendant two policies of liability insurance. Thirty per cent of the aggregate premiums on these policies amounted to $374.72. The premiums earned during the time the contracts were in force amounted to $54.61. For the total, or $429.33, this suit is brought.
The trial was had before the court without a jury resulting in a judgment in favor of plaintiff for $450.80, including interest. Defendant appeals.
Each of the policies provides that the policy may be cancelled upon the giving of five days' written notice, and that in the event of the cancellation of the policy prior to its expiration, the insured agrees to pay the fee in full of the attorney in fact.
Defendant contends that plaintiff is not entitled to recover either the earned premium or the attorney's fees because the evidence shows that defendant got other insurance covering the same risks covered by the policies in question here, so that said policies did not go into effect.
On August 12, 1938, when the subscriber's contract was executed, defendant requested the policies to be issued to take effect on August 15, 1938. On the same day, namely, August 12, 1938, the policies were issued at plaintiff's office and mailed to defendant. The policies were dated to take effect on August 15, 1938. On August 26, 1938, defendant returned the policies to plaintiff's office with a request for cancellation. Accordingly, the policies were cancelled and the cancellation took effect August 31, 1938, under the cancellation provision contained in the policies, which required five days' notice.
The subscriber's contract provided that "all policies issued to me shall be considered to be correct, unless I notify my attorney to the contrary immediately upon receipt thereof." No such notification was made.
It is not disputed that the policies were promptly delivered to defendant pursuant to its request for...
To continue reading
Request your trial