North British Mercantile Ins. Co. v. Kemendo
| Decision Date | 11 February 1901 |
| Citation | 61 S.W. 1102 |
| Parties | NORTH BRITISH MERCANTILE INS. CO. v. KEMENDO. THURINGIA INS. CO. v. SAME. ROYAL INS. CO. v. SAME. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Error to court of civil appeals. Actions by V. Kemendo against the North British Mercantile Insurance Company, the Thuringia Insurance Company, and the Royal Insurance Company. Judgments for defendants were reversed by the court of civil appeals under an agreement that the cases were to abide the decision in the case of the same plaintiff against the Western Assurance Company, 57 S. W. 293. From the judgment of reversal, defendants bring error.
Opinion of court of civil appeals reversed, and of district court affirmed, under decision in 60 S. W. 661, under an agreement that the decisions in these cases were to abide the decision in such case.
To continue reading
Request your trial
15 cases
-
Merchants' & Mfrs' Lloyd's Ins. Exch. v. Southern T. Co.
...substantially complied with by preserving and presenting to the insurer invoices covering the stock of goods insured. Assurance Co. v. Kemendo, 94 Tex. 369, 61 S. W. 1102; Association v. Masterson, 25 Tex. Civ. App. 518, 61 S. W. 962; Insurance Co. v. Walker (Civ. App.) 156 S. W. 1095. The ......
-
Coggins v. Aetna Ins. Co.
...and that only a substantial compliance should be required. Brown v. Insurance Co., 89 Tex. 591, 35 S.W. 1060; Insurance Co. v. Kemendo, 94 Tex. 367, 61 S.W. 1102; Insurance Co. v. Redding, 68 F. 708, 15 C. C. 619; Insurance Co. v. Kearney, 94 F. 314, 36 C. C. A. 265; Id., 180 U.S. 132, 21 S......
-
Shawnee Fire Ins. Co. v. Rowell
...110 P. 763. ¶46 The question of the sufficiency of an inventory such as the one offered is settled by the case of Assurance Company v. Kemenedo, 94 Tex. 373, 61 S.W. 1102. In that case it was held that the object of an inventory in insurance cases was not to ascertain the gross value of the......
-
Commonwealth Underwriters' Agency v. Lawrence G. Co.
...up the total sum expressed, was reasonable." Roberts et al. v. Insurance Co., 19 Tex. Civ. App. 338, 48 S. W. 559; Insurance Co. v. Kemendo, 94 Tex. 367, 61 S. W. 1102. The same principles are declared in Dorroh-Kelly Co. v. Insurance Co., 104 Tex. 199, 202, 135 S. W. 1165; Fire Ass'n v. Ca......
Request a trial to view additional results