Wilkins v. State Ins. Co. of Des Moines
| Decision Date | 24 April 1890 |
| Parties | WILKINS v STATE INS. CO. OF DES MOINES. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
(Syllabus by the Court.)
The rule that if an agent exceeds his actual authority, and the person dealing with him has notice of the fact, the principal is not bound, applied to a case where a local agent of a fire insurance company assumed to waive a provision in the policy that “no insurance would be binding until actual payment of the premium;” the policy itself containing a provision that none of its terms could be waived by any one except the secretary of the company.
Appeal from district court, Rice county; BUCKHAM, Judge.
M. H. Keeley, for appellant.
A. D. Keyes, for respondent.
The defendant, an Iowa corporation, but doing business in this state, had an agent at Faribault, whose general duties were to solicit insurance, fill up the blanks in printed policies already signed by the general officers of the company, and left in his possession, countersign, and deliver the same, and collect and remit the premiums. It is undisputed in the evidence that this agent, having solicited the plaintiff for insurance on his stock, and the plaintiff being unable then to pay the premium, assumed to waive immediate payment, and to give plaintiff a temporary credit for the premium, and delivered to him the policy on which this action is brought. The agent subsequently called on the plaintiff at least twice for the premium, but the latter failed to pay; and some two and a half months after the policy was issued the property was burned, the premium being still unpaid.
The question is whether the company was bound by the act of the agent in waiving immediate payment of the premium, and giving plaintiff credit. The policy contains a provision that “no insurance shall be considered as binding until actual payment of the premium.” The same rules apply to insurance companies as to any other case of agency. They are bound by all the acts of their agents within the scope of the real or apparent authority with which they have clothed them, and no further; and it would seem well settled by the great weight of authority that, at least in the case of stock companies, a person dealing with an agent possessing the powers exercised by this agent has a right to assume, in the absence of notice to the contrary, that he has authority, pending negotiations for a contract of insurance, to waive a provision like the one quoted, and to give a short...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Meadows.,v,peoples Life Ins. Co.
...Life Ins. Co, 118 Okl. 55, 246 P. 383; Pottsville Ins. Co. v. Minnequa Springs Improvement Co, 100 Pa. 137; Wilkins v. State Ins. Co, 43 Minn. 177, 45 N.W. 1. The prospect's written application herein forewarned her of policy provisions. They are plain and she is charged with having read an......
-
Meadows v. Peoples Life Ins. Co.
... ... (Emphasis supplied.) In construing a similar statute of the ... State of Iowa, which, however, contained the additional ... language "anything in the application or ... 246 P. 383; Pottsville Ins. Co. v. Minnequa Springs ... Improvement Co., 100 Pa. 137; Wilkins v. State Ins ... Co., 43 Minn. 177, 45 N.W. 1. The prospect's written ... application herein ... ...
-
Meadows v. Peoples Life Ins. Co.
...Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 118 Okla. 55, 246 P. 383; Pottsville Ins. Co. V. Minnequa Springs Impr. Co., 100 Pa. 137; Wilkins V. State Ins. Co., 43 Minn. 177, 45 N. W. 1. The prospect's written application herein forewarned her of policy provisions. They are plain and she is charged with ha......
-
Rein v. New York Life Ins. Co.
..."is estopped from setting up powers in the agent in opposition to the express limitations contained in it." There the question was (43 Minn. 178, 45 N.W. 1) "whether the company was bound by the act of the agent in waiving immediate payment of the premium, and giving plaintiff credit. The p......