The Am. Ins. Co. v. Padfield
| Decision Date | 30 June 1875 |
| Citation | 1875 WL 8448,78 Ill. 167 |
| Parties | THE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANYv.JAMES H. PADFIELD et al. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of St. Clair county; the Hon. WILLIAM H. SNYDER, Judge, presiding.
Mr. J. M. BAILEY, Mr. J. I. NEFF, and Mr. M. W. WEIR, for the appellant.
Mr. WM. H. UNDERWOOD, for the appellees.
In this case, appellees sued out a writ of attachment against Martin Anderson, from the circuit court of St. Clair county. It was issued on the 28th day of February, 1872, and was served on the same day, by levying on lots 11 and 12, in Williams' first addition to the town of Lebanon, in that county, and by summoning James R. Padfield, as garnishee.
On the first day of the following July, Anderson applied for and obtained a policy of insurance on a dwelling house on the premises. The policy was for insurance for five years from that date. Early in September following, the house was destroyed by fire, and, on the 20th of the same month, a further affidavit was filed in the attachment suit, that, by reason of the destruction of the house by fire, the property attached had thereby become insufficient to satisfy plaintiffs' debt, and thereupon an alias writ of attachment was issued, and served on appellant, as garnishee.
On the second day of April, 1873, a trial was had in the attachment suit, which resulted in a judgment in favor of plaintiffs for $1196.43, and costs of suit. Interrogatories were filed, which were answered by appellant, denying all indebtedness to Anderson and all liability on the policy.
At the September term, 1874, a trial was had upon the interrogatories and answer, by the court and a jury. A verdict was found for plaintiffs for $600. A motion for a new trial having been overruled, judgment was rendered on the verdict, from which this appeal is prosecuted.
The defense relied on consists of the breach of three conditions in the policy, first, that Anderson warranted the premises to be free from incumbrance when he made his application for insurance, when it was, at the time, subject to the levy of the writ of attachment; second, that the house had become vacant, and had so remained for about two months before, and was vacant at the time it was burnt, and that Anderson had notice thereof, whilst the validity of the policy was, by a condition therein, made to depend upon its continuous occupancy, and it provided that, if the house should become vacant and unoccupied, the policy should become void, and the assured should not be entitled to recover for loss; and third, the assured did not make and furnish the proofs of loss, as required by the policy, within the time or in the manner specified.
In the view we take of this case, it becomes unimportant...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Connecticut Fire Ins. Co. v. Buchanan
...482; Halpin v. Aetna Fire Ins. Co., 120 N.Y. 70, 23 N.E. 988; Cook v. Continental Ins. Co., 70 Mo. 610, 35 Am.Rep. 438; American Ins. Co. v. Padfield, 78 Ill. 167; Bennett v. Agricultural Ins. Co., 50 Conn. Moore v. Phoenix Ins. Co. (N.H.) 6 Atl. 27, 10 Am.St.Rep. 384; Continental Ins. Co. ......
-
Continental Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Dunning
... ... Ashworth v. Builders' Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 112 Mass. 422, 17 Am. Rep. 117; Keith v. Quincy M. Ins. Co., 10 Allen (Mass.) 228; American Ins. Co. v. Padfield, 78 Ill. 167; Fitzgerald's Adm'x v. Conn. Fire Ins. Co., 64 Wis. 463, 25 N.W. 785. A contract of insurance on a barn and its contents, if forfeited because of nonoccupancy of the dwelling, is void as to the barn and outbuildings used in connection with the dwelling. The same ground of avoidance ... ...
-
American Fire Ins. Co. v. Brighton Cotton Manuf'g Co.
...Robertson v. French, 4 East, 135; Sawyer v. Insurance Co., 37 Wis. 518; 1 Arn. Ins. 64; Potter v. Insurance Co., 5 Hill, 147;Insurance Co. v. Padfield, 78 Ill. 167;Insurance Co. v. Martin, 8 Ins. Law J. 145; Herrman v. Insurance Co., 85 N. Y. 171;Insurance Co. v. Foster, 92 Ill. 336;Carpent......
-
Continental Ins. Co. of New York v. Dunning
... ... dwelling in connection with which the barn and other ... outhouses are used. Ashworth v. Builders' Mut. Fire ... Ins. Co., 112 Mass. 422, 17 Am.Rep. 117; Keith v ... Quincy M. Ins. Co., 10 Allen (Mass.) 228; American ... Ins. Co. v. Padfield, 78 Ill. 167; Fitzgerald's ... Adm'x v. Conn. Fire Ins. Co., 64 Wis. 463, 25 N.W ... 785. A contract of insurance on a barn and its contents, if ... forfeited because of nonoccupancy of the dwelling, is void as ... to the barn and outbuildings used in connection with the ... dwelling. The ... ...