Richard D'Aigle Co., Limited v. Western Ins. Co. of Pittsburg
Decision Date | 23 February 1915 |
Docket Number | 21019 |
Citation | 67 So. 827,136 La. 777 |
Parties | RICHARD D'AIGLE CO., Limited, v. WESTERN INS. CO. OF PITTSBURG. In re WESTERN INS. CO. OF PITTSBURG |
Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
(Syllabus by the Court.)
A policy of fire insurance containing the provision that 'this entire policy shall be void * * * in case of any fraud or false swearing by the insured touching any matter relating to this insurance or the subject thereof, whether before or after the loss,' becomes void by the making of a false inventory going to show that the stock of goods destroyed by fire was more than twice its real value. And the insurer is not responsible to the insured for damages and injury to said stock of goods by fire, although he did not predicate his proof of loss upon the fraudulent inventory.
It is immaterial that a false inventory may have been not made for the purpose of deceiving the insurer, and that it was made for the purpose of making false representations to other parties. The question relates to the value of the goods destroyed for which the insured is making claim and it is material. The attempted fraud is a breach of the condition of the policy and is a bar to recovery.
Thomas C. Plauche, of Lake Charles, for plaintiff.
John C. Hollingsworth, of New Orleans, for defendnat.
Plaintiff's claim is on a New York standard fire insurance policy. It is resisted by the company on two conditions contained in the policy, namely:
'This entire policy shall be void if the insured has concealed or misrepresented, in writing or otherwise, any material fact or circumstance concerning this insurance or the subject thereof; or if the interest of the insured in the property be not truly stated therein; or in case of any fraud or false swearing by the insured touching any matter relating to this insurance or the subject thereof, whether before or after a loss.'
-- and for the violation of the iron safe clause contained therein.
A judgment in favor of the defendant in the district court was reversed by the Court of Appeal, and the judgment of the latter court is before us for review.
The defendant company alleges that plaintiff made a fraudulent inventory in the latter part of the year 1912, a short time prior to the fire which destroyed the stock of goods belonging to plaintiff and insured by defendant, and that this inventory, together with one taken earlier in the same year, was submitted to the officers of the company after the fire.
The policy required that at least one inventory should be made annually, and plaintiff made two inventories during the year. There inventories, together with others taken in previous years, were kept in an inventory book, and all of these inventories were submitted after the fire to the officers of the defendant company at one time. But, in making its proof of loss, plaintiff based its claim upon the inventory taken in the early part of the year, which was not shown to have been fraudulently made, and it seeks to evade the consequences of the provision of the policy quoted above which says that:
'In case of any fraud or false swearing by the insured touching any matter relating to this insurance or the subject thereof, whether before or after a loss,' shall avoid the policy.
The condition is clear and explicit, and it is reasonable. Plaintiff did attempt to perpetrate a fraud when it entered a fraudulent inventory upon its inventory book, and when it submitted this fraudulent inventory to the defendant company. It falsely misrepresented that it had a stock of goods of some $ 23,000 on hand, when in reality it had a stock valued at about $ 11,000.
In the case of Jones & Pickett, Ltd., v. Michigan Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 132 La. 847, 61 So. 846, where the insured showed that certain foreclosure proceedings against the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State ex rel. Arel v. Farrington
... ... Marion v. Ins. Co., 35 Mo. 148; Schulter v. Ins ... Co., 62 ... Hall v. Western ... Underwriters' Assn., 106 Mo.App. 476; Cloak & Suit Co. v. Ins. Co., 141 N.Y.S. 553; Richard ... D'Aigle Co. v. Ins. Co., 136 La. 777; ... ...
-
Buccola v. Natl. Fire Ins. Co. of Hartford, Conn
... ... Co., ... 110 U.S. 81, 3 S.Ct. 507, 28 L.Ed. 76; Richard ... D'Aigle Co. v. Western Ins. Co., 136 La. 777, 67 So ... ...
-
Garnier v. Aetna Ins. Co. of Hartford
... ... 938, 52 So. 104, 32 L.R.A. (N.S.) 453; ... Richard D'Aigle Co. v. Western Ins. Co., 136 La ... 777, 67 So ... ...
-
Gulf Insurance Company v. Chandler, Civ. A. No. 7322.
...Co., La.App., 113 So.2d 56; Germier v. Springfield Fire & Marine Insurance Co., 109 La. 341, 33 So. 361; Richard D'Aigle Co. v. Western Insurance Co., 136 La. 777, 67 So. 827; Alfred Hiller Co. v. Insurance Co. of North America, 125 La. 938, 52 So. 104, 32 L.R.A.,N.S., A proper decree shoul......