The Albany City Fire Ins. Co. v. Keating
| Decision Date | 31 January 1868 |
| Citation | 46 Ill. 394,1868 WL 4889 |
| Parties | THE ALBANY CITY FIRE INSURANCE COMPANYv.MARTIN KEATING. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
WRIT OF ERROR to the Court of Common Pleas of the City of Cairo; the Hon. JOHN H. MULKEY, Judge, presiding.
The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
Messrs. O'MELVENY & HOUCK, for the plaintiff in error.
Messrs. ALLEN & WEBB and Mr. D. T. LINEGAR, for the defendant in error.
This was an action of debt, brought by Martin Keating, in the court below, against the “Albany Fire Insurance Company,” on a policy of insurance issued by plaintiff in error, for a loss by fire. To the declaration in the court below, the company filed the general issue, and a number of special pleas. These pleas set up a condition in the policy, which is this: “If during the insurance, the risk be increased by the erection of buildings, or by the use or occupation of neighboring premises, or otherwise, or from any other cause, if the company shall so elect, it shall be optional with the company to terminate the insurance after notice is given to the assured or his representatives, of their intention to do so, in which case the company will refund a ratable proportion of the premium. The second plea avers that the company did, on the 15th day of May, 1866, give notice that they would cancel the policy and refund a ratable proportion of the premium, and that they did tender the same on the next day. After reciting the condition, the third plea avers that a city pump and works were erected within one hundred feet of the house insured, in which fire was employed, which increased the hazard of the building, and that the company, on the 15th day of May, 1866, notified defendant in error, that they had elected to terminate his policy, and that on the next day they tendered to him the ratable proportion of the premium.
The fourth plea, like the others, recites the same condition in the policy; avers the issuing of a previous policy on a survey that described the building as being occupied as a dwelling and saloon; that the first policy expired on the 10th day of April, 1866, and that on that day defendant in error represented that the survey first made was in all respects correct, and that the property was occupied as it had been when the survey was made. And the plea avers that it was not only occupied as a dwelling and a saloon, but also as a boarding house, which increased the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The State ex rel. Garth v. Switzler
... ... v. Heege, 135 Mo. 112; ... Henderson v. Ins. Co., 34 N.E. 565; Moses v. The ... Mayor, 51 Ala. 198 ... Lowell v. Boston, ... 111 Mass. 454; Feldman v. City Council, 23 S.C. 62; ... Bank v. Iola, 2 Dillon, C. C ... Charleston, South Carolina, having been destroyed by fire, ... the city council passed an ordinance providing for ... ...
-
German Insurance Company of Freeport, Illinois v. Rounds
... ... (Bowlin v. Hekla Fire Ins. Co., 31 N.W. [Minn.], ... 859; Kyte v. Commercial ... 453; Home Ins. Co. v. Curtis, 32 Mich. 402; ... Albany City Ins. Co. v. Keating, 46 Ill. 395; ... Van Valkenburgh ... ...
-
Bowling v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.
... ... E ... Bowling, of Pauls Valley, and W. L. Farmer, of Oklahoma City, ... for plaintiff in error ... Embry, ... Johnson, ... Federal Life Ins. Co., 353 Ill. 541, 187 N.E. 484; ... Albany City Fire Ins. Co. v. Keating, 46 Ill. 394; ... Peoria Marine & Fire Ins ... ...
- Brown v. Fed. Life Ins. Co.