Mark Twain Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Continental Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 02 January 1923 |
| Docket Number | No. 17379.,17379. |
| Citation | 247 S.W. 215 |
| Parties | MARK TWAIN SAVINGS & LOAN ASS'N v. CONTINENTAL INS. CO. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Hannibal Court of Common Pleas; Charles T. Hays, Judge.
"Not to be officially published."
Action by the Mark Twain Savings & Association against the Continental Insurance Company. Judgment for plaintiff and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Leahy, Saunders & Walther, of St. Louis, and Mahan & Mahan, of Hannibal, for appellant.
Byrne E. Bigger, of Laclede, and Rindlen & White, for respondent.
This is an action at law by a mortgagee upon a fire insurance policy in the sum of $1,025. Upon submission of the cause to the court, sitting as a jury, upon an agreed statement of facts there was a finding for plaintiff for the full amount of the policy. From this judgment defendant brings the cause here for review.
The sole question presented is whether the court properly construed the provisions of the policy.
The facts are these: On May 22, 1916, the defendant company issued to one R. N. Gilbert, who was then the owner in fee of the property insured, the insurance policy sued on, which insured a frame dwelling house situated on the property in the sum of $1,025. Previous to the issuance of the policy, Gilbert and wife had executed a deed of trust on the property to secure a promissory note in the principal sum of $1,400 payable to the plaintiff, and at the time of the loss there was due plaintiff on said note the sum of $1,198.23. On the 19th day of November, 1917, Gilbert and wife conveyed all of their right, title and interest in the property to one Elsea, and thereafter on the 1st day of March, 1918, the dwelling house was totally destroyed by fire. The policy in suit contained a "loss payable" rider as follows:
"Loss, if any, payable to Mark Twain Savings and Loan Association or mortgagee, as that interest may appear at the time of the loss."
The policy also contained the following stipulation:
"This entire policy, unless otherwise provided by agreement indorsed thereon, or added hereto, shall be void if * * * the interest of the insured be other than unconditional and sole ownership; or if the subject of the insurance be a building on ground not owned by the insured in fee simple * * *; or if any change other than by death of an insured take place in the interest, title, or possession of the subject of insurance (except change of occupants without increase of hazard), whether by legal process or judgment or by voluntary act of the insured or otherwise."
Likewise this provision:
"If, with the consent of this company, an interest under this policy shall exist in favor of a mortgagee, or if any person or corporation have an interest in the subject of insurance other than the interest of the insured as described herein, the conditions hereinbefore contained shall apply in the manner expressed in such provisions and conditions of insurance relating to such interest as shall be written upon, attached or appended hereto."
It was shown by the evidence that the plaintiff knew nothing...
To continue reading
Request your trial