American Insurance v. Crawford

Citations

• 89 Ill. 62

Syllabus

<p>1. Settlement—when conclusive. A settlement by one insured against loss by fire with the agent of the insurance company, if fairly and honestly made, is conclusive, although nothing is paid for a portion of the property destroyed, but if it was the result of falsehood and fraud on the part of the adjusting agent, then it is not binding or conclusive on any one, and this is a question of fact for the jury.</p> <p>2. Instruction—when strict accuracy required. Where the evidence upon an issue of fact is conflicting and evenly balanced, the instructions of the court upon the law applicable to the point involved should be strictly accurate, to enable the jury to arrive at a correct conclusion.</p> <p>X</p> <p>3. Same—assuming facts. An instruction which assumes that certain representations were made to induce a settlement for less than was due, and that such representations are false and fraudulent, is calculated to mislead the jury, as an expression of opinion that such representations are false and fraudulent, and is erroneous.</p> <p>4. Same—ignoring an important fact. In an action on a policy of insurance, an instruction which ignores a provision in the policy by which the insurer only undertook to pay two-thirds of the cash value of the property insured in case of loss, is objectionable.</p> <p>5. Same—should not be vague and uncertain. An instruction should not be vague and uncertain, so as to render it difficult to understand the principle intended to be announced.</p>