Phoenix Ins. Co. of Hartford, Conn., v. Adams
| Decision Date | 10 May 1910 |
| Citation | 127 S.W. 1008 |
| Parties | PH×NIX INS. CO. OF HARTFORD, CONN., v. ADAMS. |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Hardin County.
"Not to be officially reported."
Action by Clarence Adams against the Ph nix Insurance Company of Hartford, Conn. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
L. A Faurest and C. H. Sheild, for appellant.
H. L James, for appellee.
This appeal is from a judgment for $600. It is conceded that appellant issued a policy for that sum on a brick house in the city of Elizabethtown, Ky. in favor of appellee, that appellee paid all the premiums as he contracted to, and that the house was destroyed, or partly destroyed, by fire which started in an adjoining house. The substance of appellant's claim for a reversal is that there was a keg of powder in the building adjoining appellee's, which exploded and damaged his building more than the fire, for which damage, under the terms of the policy sued on, it was not responsible. Appellant alleged that it was only responsible for the loss occasioned by fire, and upon this theory the case was tried in the lower court. The jury found that appellee's loss, caused by fire alone, was $1,200 one-half of which was covered by the policy of appellant. The proof sustains this finding, and there is no serious contention on the part of appellant that the jury erred as to its finding.
Appellant claims that the action was prematurely instituted, and that it was entitled to an arbitration under the terms of the policy which appellee refused, and for this reason it denied all liability on the policy. Appellee agrees that he refused to submit to arbitration the question of damages to his building by the explosion and appellant's liability therefor, as such an arbitration was not provided for in the policy; also for the further reason that appellant did not make an attempt, in good faith, to agree with him as to the value of the property lost by reason of the fire. He stated that he made an itemized statement of the loss and submitted it to appellant's agent, but that appellant did not, in turn, make such a statement and give to him. There was, in fact, no disagreement as to the value of the property lost. Appellant only refused to accede to the value of the property lost as stated by appellee, and under the circumstances it was not entitled to an arbitration under the terms of the policy.
These were the only issues upon the trial, and each of the parties introduced testimony sustaining their contentions....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Delametter v. The Home Ins. Co.
...Ins. Co., 203 N.Y. 283, 96 N.E. 452, 38 L.R.A. (N.S.) 474; Miller v. London & Lancashire Fire Ins. Co., 41 Ill. App. 395; Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Adams, 127 S.W. 1008 (Ky.); Metropolitan Casualty Ins. Co. v. Bergheim, 21 Colo. App. 527, 122 Pac. 812; Germania Fire Ins. Co. v. Roost, 55 Ohio St.......
-
Delametter v. Home Ins. Co.
...& Lancashire Fire Ins. Co., 41 Ill.App. 395; Liverpool & London & Globe Ins. Co. v. Currie, 234 S.W. 232 (Texas); Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Adams, 127 S.W. 1008 (Kentucky); Metropolitan Casualty Ins. Co. v. Bergheim, Colo.App. 527, 122 P. 812; Germania Fire Ins. Co. v. Roost, 55 Ohio St. 581, 45 ......
-
Westchester Fire Ins. Co. v. Bell
... ... Co., 83 N. J. Law, 342, 84 A ... 1050; Eppens v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 99 A.D. 221, ... 90 N.Y.S. 1035; Ph nix Ins. Co. v. Adams ... ...
-
Exchange Bank of Novinger v. Iowa State Ins. Co.
...Co., 224 N. Y. 47, 120 N. E. 86, 13 A. L. R. 875; Insurance Co. v. Bell, 151 Ga. 191, 106 S. E. 186, 13 A. L. R. 880; Phcenix Ins. Co. v. Adams (Ky.) 127 S. W. 1008; Met. Casualty Ins. Co. v. Bergheim, 21 Colo. App. 527, 122 P. 812; Caballero & Basualdo v. Insurance Co., 15 La. Ann. 217; Cl......