Kaplan v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., 42621
| Decision Date | 09 March 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 1,No. 42621,42621,1 |
| Parties | Abe KAPLAN v. FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Syllabus by the Court
A provision in a burglary insurance policy requiring the insured to 'keep rec ords of all insured property in such manner that the company can accurately determine therefrom the loss' is a valid and binding part of the contract. Where there was no record whatever concerning a diamond ring alleged to have been kept in a safe located on the premises described in the policy, it was not a portion of the insured property and there is no liability under the policy for its loss.
Abe Kaplan brought suit on a burglary insurance policy against Fireman's Fund Insurance Company for losses due to a burglary. The safe and cash register in plaintiff's shoe store were forcibly entered, and plaintiff sought to recover $566.33 which was stolen in cash, $1,200 as the value of a personal diamond ring stolen from the safe, $125 damage to the safe, and $73.87 damage to the cash register. The insurance company admitted liability for all items except the personal diamond ring and moved for a directed verdict against the plaintiff for the value of the ring and in favor of plaintiff for the undisputed items, which was granted. Plaintiff appeals from the verdict and the judgment entered thereon, contending that he is entitled to recover the value of the ring.
Lewis & Javetz, Emanuel Lewis, Savannah, for appellant.
Brannen, Clark & Hester, Perry Brannen, Savannah, for appellee.
The insurance company's motion for directed verdict was based upon three grounds, all relating to the provisions of the insurance contract. We need only consider one of these grounds to affirm the judgment below.
The liability of the company under the contract is, by its terms, made subject to the conditions stated therein. Condition 5 provides:
It is admitted in the brief for the insured that '(i)f an insured keeps no books, the insurance company has a complete defense to an action on a policy requiring records.' The insured contends, however, that if he did in fact keep books and records, then the adequacy of his records required by the policy is a matter for determination by a jury, citing American Casualty Co. v. Cohen, 40 Ga.App....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Michigan Millers Mut. Ins. Co. v. Lindsey
...251 A.2d 521 (1969); Batts Restaurant, Inc. v. Commercial Ins. Co. of Newark, 406 F.2d 118 (7th Cir. 1969); Kaplan v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., 115 Ga.App. 365, 154 S.E.2d 726 (1967); Hammond v. Globe Indemnity Co., 193 So.2d 319 (La.App.1966); Standard Accident Ins. Co. v. Ponsell's Drug St......