Robinson v. Pa. Ins. Co.

• Decision Date: 11 April 1895
• Citation: 87 Me. 399,32 A. 996
• Parties: ROBINSON v. PENNSYLVANIA INS. CO.
• Court: Maine Supreme Court

32 A. 996

87 Me. 399

ROBINSON

v. PENNSYLVANIA INS. CO.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

April 11, 1895.

(Official.)

Exceptions from supreme judicial court, Knox county.

Action by Sophronia E. Robinson against the Pennsylvania Insurance Company. To a verdict for defendant, plaintiff brings exceptions. Exceptions sustained.

This was an action on a policy of fire insurance, in which the jury returned a verdict for the defendant, and the plaintiff took exceptions. The exceptions show the following facts:

On the 27th day of May, 1892, the plaintiff took out a policy from the defendant company for three years at a premium of 1 per cent. for three years, on certain goods and chattels. A part of the goods and chattels covered by said policy was: "Three hundred and twenty-five dollars on her vehicles of all kinds, harnesses, robes, and all horse furnishings, hay and grain, together with farming and miscellaneous tools, all while contained in her frame stable and carriage house buildings, belonging with said dwelling house and on said lot."

The plaintiff was then in occupation of a 1 1/2 story frame dwelling house and ell, with a stable attached to the ell.

On the same lot of land the plaintiff erected a new building, which was finished on the 28th day of May, 1892, the day following the issuing of the above-named policy. The husband and agent of the plaintiff testified that said new building was to be used for a carriage house and paint shop. It was situated on the same parcel of land upon which the plaintiff's dwelling house, ell, and stable were standing, but by actual measurement was 189 feet from such stable.

On the 30th day of June, 1892, the defendant company issued to the plaintiff and her son, Oscar E. Robinson, a policy of insurance of that date upon said new "carriage house and paint shop building" and its contents, consisting of paint stock, furniture, vehicles, etc. This last-named policy was for one year, at a premium of 1 per cent for one year. There was testimony tending to show that the new building, from the time of its completion to the 30th day of September, was used in part for the storage of carriages, etc., a portion of which was not intended for use by the plaintiff or her family, but for the purpose of traffic, and in part by said Oscar E. Robinson in making and painting carriages. During said time said Oscar E. had made one carriage, and bad painted that and one other carriage in said building.

On the 30th day of September, 1892, the new building and its contents were destroyed by fire. The contents consisted of several carriages and several parts of unfinished carriages, the property of the plaintiff, and also a quantity of paint stock valued at $144.55, the property of Oscar E. Robinson, the carriage maker and painter.

The defendant claimed that the goods and chattels insured to the plaintiff by the policy of May 27th were not within the terms of the policy, unless such policy covered her property in the new building.

Before the commencement of this suit the defendant company had paid to the plaintiff and Oscar E. Robinson the full amount of insurance under the policy of June 30th on the new building and contents. The plaintiff brought this suit upon the first-named policy, —that of May 27th,—and claimed to recover for the goods and chattels which were contained in the new building at the time of its destruction by fire.

The defendant contended that the policy of May 27th, upon which this suit is brought, did not, by its terms or in fact, insure any of the contents of the new carriage house and paint shop...