Western Assur. Co. v. Williams

• Decision Date: 16 July 1894
• Citation: 21 S.E. 370,94 Ga. 128
• Parties: WESTERN ASSUR. CO. v. WILLIAMS.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

21 S.E. 370

94 Ga. 128

WESTERN ASSUR. CO. v. WILLIAMS.

Supreme Court of Georgia

July 16, 1894

Syllabus by the Court.

1. The original declaration contained enough to amend by, and there was no error in allowing the amendment.

2. The consent of a fire insurance company, given, whether in writing or in parol, by its duly-authorized agent, and acted upon by the insured, that the goods insured might be removed into another building without vitiating the policy, is, if sufficiently proved, binding upon the company notwithstanding stipulations in the policy that "no officer, agent, or other representative of this company shall have power to waive any provision or condition of this policy, except such as by the terms of this policy may be the subject of agreement indorsed hereon or added hereto; and, as to such provisions and conditions, no officer, agent, or representative shall have such power, or be deemed or held to have waived such provisions or conditions, unless such waiver, if any, shall be written upon or attached hereto; nor shall any privilege or permission affecting the insurance under this policy exist or be claimed by the insured unless so written or attached." The evidence that the agent was duly authorized would, however, have to be such as to show that he had express authority in the given instance to represent the company in giving its consent otherwise than in the manner provided for in the policy, or that an implied authority so to do might rightly be inferred from some previous course of dealing in like cases by the agent with the company's knowledge and assent, manifested by ratification or otherwise.

Error from city court of Richmond; W. F. Eve, Judge.

Action by J. H. Williams against the Western Assurance Company of Toronto, Canada. From a judgment overruling a demurrer to the declaration, defendant brings error. Affirmed.

W. K Milley, for plaintiff in error.

C. H Cohen, for defendant in error.

SIMMONS J.

1. Williams held a policy of insurance from the defendant upon certain household and kitchen furniture and other personal goods situated in his dwelling house, No. 313 Fifth street in the city of Augusta. On August 20, 1892, he called on an agent of the defendant and informed him that he was temporarily abandoning housekeeping, and desired to move his furniture, etc., covered by this insurance, to a certain storehouse in Augusta. The agent told him he could move the furniture as desired; that he would so enter it on the books of the company, and he (Williams) could consider the transfer as made, and bring his policy to him at some future time and he would make the entry thereon. On August 27th thereafter the property was entirely destroyed by fire. On the next day after the fire he called upon the agent and asked for the insurance papers to prove his loss, and was informed by the agent that the defendant denied all liability under the policy. He thereupon brought his action against the company for $1,000, the amount of the insurance. His declaration was demurred to on various grounds, which are set out in the official report, and he amended the declaration...