McDonald v. Royal Indem. Ins. Co.
Decision Date | 17 October 1932 |
Docket Number | No. 92.,92. |
Citation | 162 A. 620 |
Parties | McDONALD v. ROYAL INDEMNITY INS. CO. |
Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. The provisions of an insurance policy examined and found not to include any obligation to settle ail action at law brought against its assured.
2. The case is barren of evidence of negligent management by defendant of an action brought against its assured.
Appeal from Supreme Court.
Suit by Henry B. McDonald against the Royal Indemnity Insurance Company. From a judgment of nonsuit, the plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Bain & Fowler, of Boonton (Alfred Brenner, of Bayonne, of counsel), for appellant.
King & Vogt, of Morristown (Harold A. Price, of Morristown, of counsel), for appellee.
This is an appeal from a Judgment of nonsuit. The plaintiff procured from the defendant a policy of indemnity insurance. He became involved in an automobile accident, and a judgment was recovered against him. He sought in this action to recover damages against the indemnity company, alleging that it had failed and neglected to properly protect and represent him as required by the terms of its policy. It appears that the defendant company could have settled the action against the plaintiff for $2,000. A verdict for $7,500, however, was recovered. This judgment was set aside. Subsequently the action could have been settled for $3,500, but a judgment was recovered for $20,000.
The policy is in the usual form. The pertinent portions are as follows: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
White v. North Bergen Tp.
...between insured and insurer, overruling the precedent unanimously endorsed by our then highest court in McDonald v. Royal Indem. Ins. Co., 109 N.J.L. 308, 162 A. 620 (E. & A. 1932). In In re Quinlan, 70 N.J. 10, 355 A.2d 647, Cert. den., 429 U.S. 922, 97 S.Ct. 319, 50 L.Ed.2d 289 (1976), we......
-
Rova Farms Resort, Inc. v. Investors Ins. Co. of America
...into the bare contractual relationship sometimes mentioned as existing between insured and insurer. Cf. McDonald v. Royal Indemnity Ins. Co., 109 N.J.L. 308, 162 A. 620 (E. & A. 1932); Auerbach v. Maryland Cas. Co., 236 N.Y. 247, 140 N.E. 577 There was always, in fact and in law, a conflict......
-
Pickett v. Lloyd's
...sometimes mentioned as existing between insured and insurer." 65 N.J. at 491, 323 A.2d 495 (citing McDonald v. Royal Indem. Ins. Co., 109 N.J.L. 308, 162 A. 620 (E. & A.1932)). Agents of an insurance company are obligated to "exercise good faith and reasonable skill in advising insureds." W......
-
McCombs v. Fidelity & Cas. Co. of New York
... ... Mann, 46 S.W.2d 777 (Ky.); Streat Coal Co. v ... Frankfort Genl. Ins. Co., 142 N.E. 352 (N. Y.); ... Lander et al. v. Jordan, 59 S.W.2d 959 ... Breen, 271 N.Y.S. 744, l. c. 747 (1934); McDonald v ... Royal Ind. Ins. Co., 162 A. 620 (N.J.); City of ... Wakefield ... ...