Rochester Ins. Co. v. Martin

• Decision Date: 01 January 1868
• Citation: 13 Minn. 54
• Parties: ROCHESTER INS. CO. v. JOHN MARTIN.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

Page 54

13 Minn. 54

ROCHESTER INS. CO.

v. JOHN MARTIN.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court, Goodhue county.

Action on a promissory note. Defendant interposed an answer, a demurrer to which was sustained by the court below, and judgment for plaintiff entered.

Charles C. Wilson, for appellant.

Stearns & Start, for respondent.

WILSON, C. J.

On the thirtieth day of April, 1866, the plaintiff issued to the respondent a policy of insurance, by which it assumed to indemnify him for three years from its date from any loss by accident, or disease resulting in death, of any of certain horses described in the policy, and the note in suit was given for the premium demanded by the plaintiff for the contract of indemnity.

The plaintiff was organized under chapter 55 of the General Laws of 1858, as amended by chapter 66 of the General Laws of 1860 and by chapter 52 of the General Laws of 1864. Section 2 of its charter or articles of incorporation provides: "Said company is formed for the purpose of making insurance upon dwellings, stores, and all kinds of buildings, and upon household furniture, merchandise, and other property, against loss or damage by fire, lightning, and inland navigation and transportation. * * *" Appended to a printed copy of the articles of incorporation, which are attached to the paper book, is the following resolution, dated January 25, 1865: "Resolved, that section 2 of the articles of incorporation be amended so as to read, after the word `transportation,' `also live stock against death.'"

The defendant, among other things, alleges in his answer that he executed and delivered to the plaintiff the note mentioned in the complaint, and another note for $93, and at the same time, and as part of the same transaction, the plaintiff executed and delivered to him a policy of insurance, together with its charter and by-laws; and he "avers that said note in the complaint, and the note for $93, and said policy of insurance, with the said application, charter, and by-laws, constitute but one contract and transaction, and the sole and only consideration for each and both said notes was the said policy of insurance."

"The defendant further avers that the plaintiff never amended its charter; that the pretended amendment thereof appended thereto was never adopted or approved by the members of the corporation, or by the directors thereof, and was never signed or sealed or acknowledged or certified by the members of said corporation, or by its directors or officers, or any of them; and that said amendment is not authorized by law."

"The defendant further avers that he is ignorant, and unable to read or write, and was informed by the plaintiff, by its agents, at the time he executed said notes, that the said plaintiff had, by its charter, authority to issue said policy and make said contract of insurance; that said statements and representations were then and there false and fraudulent, and were made to defraud this defendant; and this defendant believed...