Meily Co. v. London & L. Fire Ins Co.
| Decision Date | 03 December 1906 |
| Docket Number | 12 |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
| Parties | MEILY CO. v. LONDON & LANCASHIRE FIRE INS. CO. |
A. H Wintersteen, for plaintiff in error.
Frank R. Shattuck, for defendant in error.
Before DALLAS, GRAY and BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judges.
This is a writ of error to the Circuit Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In that court the Meily Company, a merchandizing corporation, brought suit against the London & Lancashire Fire Insurance Company to recover on two fire insurance policies-- one upon its store goods, and the other on its store fixtures. The insurance company defended, inter alia, on the ground the plaintiff had set fire to the store. The jury found for the defendant, and the plaintiff sued out this writ.
While there are numerous assignments of error, the case may be treated from the aspect well summarized in the brief of the plaintiff in error, viz:
'The verdict was practically equivalent of a finding that the plaintiff corporation intentionally and fraudulently caused the fire, or knowingly participated in an act of incendiarism upon the stock and fixtures destroyed, and therefore it was not entitled to recover.' Now such verdict would be warranted if the jury found that George W. Meily, the president of the plaintiff company, was the actual owner of all of its stock and that he set fire to the store in question, or, in case he was not the sole owner, that he set fire to the store with the assent of his fellow shareholders; Kirkpatrick v. Allemania Fire Insurance Company (N.Y.) 102 A.D. 327, 92 N.Y.Supp. 466. The testimony in the case is so voluminous, the trial lasting more than a week, that it cannot be here quoted at length; but we have carefully examined it all. Without referring in detail to the evidence, and noting the fact that there was testimony to the contrary, we find that facts were proved from which the jury could inter that the business of the plaintiff was on the decline to a marked degree; that the lease had nearly expired and the landlord was unwilling to extend it; that the property was insured in excess of its value; that the plaintiff company was a family corporation; that the business was really George W. Meily's, and was carried on in corporate form as a cloak to shield it from his creditors; that the fire was caused by his incendiary act; and that the participation by his sons in the alleged...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nuffer v. Insurance Co. of North America
...149 F.2d 359, 361; Kimball Ice Co. v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 4 Cir., 18 F.2d 563, 565-566, 52 A.L.R. 799; Meily Co. v. London & Lancashire Fire Ins. Co., 3 Cir., 148 F. 683; D. I. Felsenthal Co. v. Northern Assur. Co. (Ill.), 120 N.E. 268, 270; Miller & Dobrin Fur. Co. v. Camden Fire Ins. ......
-
American States Ins. Co. v. Symes of Silverdale, Inc.
...stock, was also a creditor of the insolvent corporation, and exercised exclusive management and control of it); Meily Co. v. London & L Fire Ins. Co., 148 F. 683 (3d Cir.1906) (arson by sole shareholder would preclude recovery); Miller & Dobrin Furniture Co. v. Camden Fire Ins. Co., 55 N.J.......
-
Erlin-Lawler Enterprises, Inc. v. Fire Ins. Exchange
...F.2d 359, 361; Kimball Ice Co. v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 4 Cir., 18 F.2d 563, 565--566, 52 A.L.R. 799; Meily Co. v. London & Lancashire Fire Ins. Co., 3 Cir., 148 F. 683 (79 C.C.A. 454); D. I. Felsenthal Co. v. Northern Assur. Co., 284 Ill. 343, 120 N.E. 268, 270, 1 A.L.R. 602; Miller & Do......
-
Natalini v. Northwestern Fire & Marine Ins. Co.
... ... have been submitted to the jury. Duncan v. Fort Dodge Gas & Elec. Co., 193 Iowa, 1127, 188 N.W. 865; ... Silverstone v. London Assur. Corporation et al., 176 ... Mich. 525, 142 N.W. 776; Smith v. California Ins ... Co., 85 Me. 348, 27 A. 191 ... The ... 525, 142 ... N.W. 776; Clover Crest Farm, Inc., v. New York Cent. Mut ... Fire Ins. Co. et al., 189 A.D. 548, 179 N.Y.S. 352; ... Meily Co. v. London & Lan. Fire Ins. Co. (C. C. A.) ... 148 F. 683; Sawyers v. Commonwealth, 88 Va. 356, 13 ... S.E. 708; State of Iowa v. Millmeier, 102 ... ...