New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Central Nat. Fire Ins. Co.
Decision Date | 13 February 1925 |
Docket Number | No. 6631.,6631. |
Citation | 4 F.2d 203 |
Parties | NEW AMSTERDAM CASUALTY CO. v. CENTRAL NAT. FIRE INS. CO. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Oscar Strauss, of Des Moines, Iowa (O. M. Brockett, of Des Moines, Iowa, on the brief), for plaintiff in error.
George F. Henry, of Des Moines, Iowa (Phineas M. Henry, of Des Moines, Iowa, on the brief), for defendant in error.
Before SANBORN, Circuit Judge, and TRIEBER and PHILLIPS, District Judges.
The cause was tried to the court, a trial by jury having been waived by written stipulation of counsel, and judgment for the amount claimed rendered for the plaintiff, after a motion of the defendant for judgment had been denied. The parties will be referred to as they appeared in the trial court, the insurance company as the plaintiff, and the casualty company as the defendant.
The bond executed by the defendant on May 29, 1920, was for the sum of $30,000 to indemnify the plaintiff for any losses sustained by it by reason of the default of the Ballard-Greene-Smith Corporation, appointed general agents of the plaintiff for writing fire insurance for it in the states of Pennsylvania, Maryland, New Jersey, and New York. The contract between the plaintiff and this general agent, dated May 28, 1920, after reciting the appointment of the agent and the power bestowed on it, contained the following additional provisions:
"The said second party shall forward to the home office of the Central National Fire Insurance Company at Des Moines, Iowa, at least twice each week original daily reports and indorsements of policies issued by them or received from subagents appointed by them, and shall, not later than the 15th day of each month, forward a regular monthly account current to the first party at Des Moines, Iowa, of their own business and the original account currents received from their agents, containing detailed statement of the business done by each subagent during the preceding month, accompanied by all canceled policies and vouchers for charges made therein, together with a monthly recapitulation of all the business of said agency, and shall, not later than seventy-five (75) days after the month for which statement is rendered, forward a remittance to the said company for the balance shown to be due by monthly statement."
It further provided:
The condition of the bond of the defendant contained, among others, the following provisions:
The petition, after setting out the agreement between the plaintiff and the corporation, alleged:
It then sets out failures of the corporation to remit the amounts due for policies written by it for the plaintiff every month thereafter, which on April 1, 1921, showed a balance due the plaintiff from the corporation of $8,857.85 for moneys collected by it for policies it issued for and in behalf of the plaintiff, and the sum of $2,408.67 balance due on the Rickert, Mellinger & Co. indebtedness assumed by the corporation in its contract with the plaintiff.
A demurrer to the petition and amendment thereto was by the court overruled, whereupon the defendant filed its answer. In view of the conclusion reached by us, it is only necessary to set out the following plea in the answer, to wit:
"That one of the conditions of the bond given by it jointly with the Ballard-Greene-Smith Corporation unto the plaintiff, and under which the liability of the defendant to the plaintiff, if any, arises, which liability is sought to be enforced in this action, reads as follows, to wit: `That the obligee, upon learning of any act which may be the basis of any claim hereunder, written notice thereof shall be mailed to the surety at its office, No. 60 John street, New York City, New York, within thirty days after so learning of any such act'; and the defendant further alleges that it was provided in said bond that, upon the failure to perform the conditions thereof, the said bond should be void and of no effect."
It is then alleged that
And it pleads that by reason of the failure to give the defendant the notice, as required by the terms of its bond, it is not liable. The undisputed evidence is that the first notice by the plaintiff to the defendant of any default or breach of the contract by the corporation was given on December 20, 1920, although the current balances due to it from the corporation, beginning in May, 1920, and continuing every month thereafter, were not accounted for or paid by the corporation to the plaintiff, as required by the contract between them.
It was also shown that on June 11, 1920, the plaintiff wrote to the corporation that ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Lemay Ferry Bank v. New Amsterdam Cas. Co.
... ... New Amsterdam Casualty Company, a Corporation, et al., Defendants, New Amsterdam ... Metropolitan Life ... Ins. Co., 91 S.W.2d 160; Smith v. Mutual Ben. Health & Acc ... Casualty Co. v. Fire Ins. Co., 4 F.2d 203; ... Commercial Casualty Co. v ... [Aufrichtig v ... Columbia Nat. Life Ins. Co., 298 Mo. 1, 15, 249 S.W. 912; ... [347 Mo ... ...
-
Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Hewes
... ... 592, 112 N.E. 832; ... Standard Oil Co. v. Nat. Surety Co., 234 Ky. 764, 29 ... S.W.2d 29; ... 440, 163 P. 281; New ... Amsterdam Cas. Co. v. Cent. Nat. F. Ins. Co. (8 C. C ... ...
-
United States Shipping Bd. MF Corp. v. Aetna Cas. & S. Co.
...Assur. Co., C.C., 157 F. 695; Bank of South Jacksonville v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., D.C., 1 F.2d 43; New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Central Nat. Fire Ins. Co., 8 Cir., 4 F.2d 203; Harris v. North British & Mercantile Ins. Co., Limited, 5 Cir., 30 F.2d 94; Wachovia Bank & Trust Co. v. Indepen......
-
Minneapolis-Moline Co. v. CHICAGO, M., ST. P. & PR CO.
...Co., 8 Cir., 64 F.2d 224, 89 A. L.R. 238; Gulf Refining Co. v. Home Indemnity Co., 8 Cir., 78 F.2d 842; New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Central Nat. Fire Ins. Co., 8 Cir., 4 F.2d 203; Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp. v. Penick & Ford, 8 Cir., 101 F.2d 493; Sulzbacher v. Travelers Ins. Co., 8 ......