Planters' & Merchants' Ins. Co. v. Thurston

Decision Date01 May 1891
Citation93 Ala. 255,9 So. 268
CourtAlabama Supreme Court
PartiesPLANTERS' & MERCHANTS' INS. CO. v. THURSTON.

Appeal from city court of Birmingham; H. A. SHARPE, Judge.

This action was brought by the appellee, Charles H. Thurston against the appellant company, and was founded upon a policy of insurance issued by the defendant to the plaintiff insuring certain property against loss or damage by fire. There were several rulings upon the pleadings, but there are no assignments of error based upon such rulings. The plaintiff was engaged in the business of moving houses in the city of Birmingham, and while so engaged took from the defendant what was called a "builder's risk" upon the house involved in this suit. About two weeks after the issuance of this policy by the defendant the said house was totally destroyed by fire, as were also the tools used by the plaintiff in moving the same, which were in the house. The suit was brought to recover the insurance on the house so destroyed, as well as to recover for the loss of the tools. The testimony of the plaintiff tended to show that in making his application to the defendant for insurance, which was done orally, he stated to the agent of the defendant, one Ellis, how he was interested in the house to be insured; that upon these oral representations the agent delivered to him a certificate of insurance reciting that he was insured in an "open policy," giving the number thereof; and the testimony further tended to show that he had been so insured by the defendant at other times prior to this. The principal defense relied on by the defendant was that the plaintiff did not have an insurable interest in the house that was destroyed; but it was not controverted that the plaintiff, in his application to the agent of the defendant, told the agent that he was engaged in moving said house. The case was tried without the intervention of a jury, as is allowed by statute. Upon the evidence as adduced the court rendered judgment for the plaintiff, and on this appeal the said judgment is assigned as error.

E T. Taliaferro, for appellant.

Gregg & Thornton, for appellee.

STONE C.J.

We think it is clear under the facts of this case that Thurston had an insurable interest in the house he was engaged in moving. The money and labor he had expended on the job, and the profit he would realize on its completion, make up the sum of the loss he suffered in the destruction of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Reishus v. Implement Dealers Mut. Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • 10 December 1962
    ...it disabled him to earn the agreed compensation. Such an interest was held to be an insurable interest in Planters' & Merchants' Insurance Co. v. Thurston, 93 Ala. 255, 9 So. 268. In the early history of insurance, there was a tendency to require title and ownership as a basis of insurable ......
  • American Equitable Assur. Co. v. Powderly Coal & Lumber Co.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 28 April 1932
    ... ... Co. v ... Powderly Coal & Lbr. Co., supra; National Fire Ins. Co ... v. Tenn. Land Co. (Ala. Sup.) 139 So. 227; American ... Ins ... Co. v. Capital City Ins. Co., 81 Ala. 320, 8 So. 222; ... Planters' & Merchants' Ins. Co. v. Thurston, ... 93 Ala. 255, 9 So. 268), ... ...
  • State Insurance Company of Des Moines v. New Hampshire Trust Co.
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • 4 February 1896
    ... ... same premises. (2 May, Insurance [2d ed.] sec. 364; ... Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Copeland, 8 So. Rep. [Ala.] 48; ... German Ins. Co. v. Heiduk, 30 ... Co. v. Weaver, 70 Md. 536; ... Patten v. Merchants & Farmers Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 38 N.H ...          The ... North British & Mercantile Ins. Co., 7 ... Nev., 174; Planters Mutual Ins. Co. v. Deford, ... 38 Md. 382; Field v. Ins. Co. of North ... Co., 134 Pa. 570; ... Planters & Merchants Ins. Co. v. Thurston, 93 Ala ... 255; Pelzer Mfg Co. v. Sun Fire Office, 15 S.E. [S ... ...
  • Woodruff v. Southeastern Fire Insurance Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • 22 April 1970
    ...pp. 507, 508. Accord: Commercial Fire Insurance Co. v. Capital City Ins. Co., 1886, 81 Ala. 320, 8 So. 222; Planters' & Merchants' Ins. Co. v. Thurston, 1891, 93 Ala. 255, 9 So. 268. 9 43 Am.Jur.2d Insurance § 936; 45 C.J.S. Insurance § 551, p. 293 n. 27; see Trinity Universal Ins. Co., Dal......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT