Wood v. Cascade Fire & Marine Ins. Co.

• Decision Date: 13 March 1894
• Citation: 8 Wash. 427,36 P. 267
• Court: Washington Supreme Court
• Parties: WOOD ET AL. v. CASCADE FIRE & MARINE INS. CO.

36 P. 267

8 Wash. 427

WOOD ET AL. v. CASCADE FIRE & MARINE INS. CO.

Supreme Court of Washington

March 13, 1894

Appeal from superior court, King county; R. Osborn, Judge.

Action by Henry C. Wood and others against the Cascade Fire & Marine Insurance Company on an insurance policy. Judgment for plaintiffs. Defendant appeals. Reversed.

Hughes, Hastings & Stedman, for appellant.

Fishback Elder & Hardin, for respondents.

ANDERS J.

This action was brought by the respondents upon a fire insurance policy issued to them by the appellant, to recover the sum of $1,500, the amount for which certain property was alleged to have been insured, and which was destroyed by fire. The appellant is a corporation organized under and by virtue of the laws of the territory (now state) of Washington, having its principal place of business at Seattle. The respondents at the time of the alleged insurance and loss by fire, were residents of the city and state of New York, and the property insured was personal property then in the said city and state. The sufficiency of the complaint does not appear to be questioned. But the defendant (appellant here), as an affirmative defense to the action, pleaded that the defendant was a corporation organized under the laws of the territory of Washington, and that the policy of insurance sued upon, a copy of which is set forth in plaintiffs' complaint, was procured from one Lithgow by one William Warbeck, an insurance broker of the city and state of New York, and was, on or about the 1st day of November, 1890, issued to the plaintiffs, who were at that time and at all times since residents of the state of New York, and described property then and at all times thereafter situated in the city of New York. That the legislature of the state of New York had enacted certain general laws regulating the business of insurance in said state, and providing when and upon what conditions insurance companies organized under the laws of other states might issue policies of insurance upon property in said state, and might be entitled to transact insurance business therein, and provided that it should be unlawful for any such insurance company to transact any business of insurance whatever until said laws had first been complied with. That the legislature of the state of New York had enacted a law for the further regulation of the business of insurance in said state amendatory of the laws theretofore in force, which law, among other things, declared that any policies of insurance issued by companies not having complied with the requirements of the general insurance laws of said state should be void and of no force or effect whatever, which law was approved May 23 1884, and amended by chapter 113 of the Laws of 1885 of said state, approved April 7, 1885, and further amended by chapter 552 of the Laws of 1890, approved June 7, 1890. That the aforesaid laws were in force in said state of New York at and prior to the 1st day of November, 1890, and still continue to be in force in said state; and that the defendant had never at any time, or in any manner, complied with the provisions of the aforesaid laws of said state of New York, and had never at any time been licensed or empowered to take any risks or to issue any policies of insurance on property situated in the said state of New York, or to residents thereof, or to transact any business whatever, authorized by its charter, within the said state of New York, and has never had the capital required by the provisions of the aforesaid laws; and that the pretended policy of insurance sued on was issued, delivered, and received in violation of the said laws of the state of...