Levin v. Northwestern Nat. Ins. Co. of Milwaukee
| Decision Date | 15 March 1911 |
| Docket Number | 276,in Equity. |
| Citation | 185 F. 981 |
| Parties | LEVIN v. NORTHWESTERN NAT. INS. CO. OF MILWAUKEE. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa |
Henderson & Fribourg, for complainant.
Guernsey Parker & Miller, for defendant.
This suit is to cancel and set aside an award of arbitrators fixing the amount of damage to complainant's building insured by the defendant, upon the ground of the fraud of the defendant in procuring their appointment, the inadequacy of the award, and that the arbitrator selected by the defendant was not a disinterested person, but one employed by defendant and other insurance companies regularly for the purpose of acting as an arbitrator in cases like the present. In the brief of counsel for complainant it is said:
'The questions to be determined are: (1) Is the award so grossly inadequate as to warrant its being set aside? and (2) was the arbitrator selected by the defendant such a disinterested arbitrator as required by the terms of the policy and the agreement of the parties?'
There is no substantial evidence of any fraud or improper conduct upon the part of the defendant in procuring the appointment of the arbitrators, or misconduct upon their part in making the award, and this question is dismissed without further consideration.
The estimates of the amount of damage to complainant's building by the fire, as made by the witnesses called by him varies; the lowest exceeding by several hundred dollars the amount of the award. But mere inadequacy in the amount, or mistake of judgment upon the part of the arbitrators in arriving at the same, is not sufficient to warrant the court in interfering therewith, unless it be so great as to indicate corruption or partisan bias on the part of the arbitrators. Burchell v. Marsh, 17 How. 350, 15 L.Ed. 96; Vincent v. German Insurance Co., 120 Iowa, 272, 94 N.W. 458.
In Burchell v. Marsh, above, Justice Grier, speaking for the court, said:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Schwartzman v. London & Lancashire Fire Ins. Co., Limited, of Liverpool, England
...Can Co., 102 Md. 362. (2) The fact that an appraiser has acted in the same capacity on other occasions does not disqualify him. Levine v. Ins. Co., 185 F. 981; Stemmer Scottish Union & National, 33 Ore. 65; Remington v. London Assur. Co., 43 N.Y.S. 431; Continental Ins. Co. v. Vanlandingham......
-
Security Printing Company, a Corp. v. Westchester Fire Insurance Company of New York City, a Corp.
... ... Young v. Penn ... Fire Ins. Co., 269 Mo. 1, 187 S.W. 856; Zaller v ... Laclede ... Insurance, Supplement, page 1505, section 3631; Levin v ... Northwestern Insurance Company, 185 F. 981, 982; ... ...
-
Security Printing Co. v. Connecticut Fire Insurance Company of Hartford, Connecticut
... ... should be reached. Dwookin et al. v. Caledonian Ins. Co., ... supra. (3) Such an appraisement, when not ... commencement, and not the end of litigation. Levin v ... N.W. Nat'l Ins. Co., 185 F. 981; Perry v. Ins ... ...
-
Firemen's Fund Ins. Co. v. Flint Hosiery Mills
...has held to the contrary, and such is the general rule. See volume 7, Supp. Cooley's Briefs on Insurance, p. 1511; Levin v. Northwestern National Ins. Co. (C. C.) 185 F. 981; Cohen v. Atlas Assurance Co., 163 App. Div. 381, 148 N. Y. S. 563; Messler v. Williamsburgh City Fire Ins. Co. (R. I......