Beatty v. Lycoming County Mutual Insurance

Citations

• 66 Pa. 1

Syllabus

<p>1. A condition in a fire policy was that notice of a fire should be given to the “ secretary forthwith.” The morning after the fire, the insured, and the local agent of the company, with his counsel, visited and examined the premises; the insured was examined on oath, his statement signed by him was sent next day by the agent to the secretary. Held, that this was a compliance with the condition.</p> <p>2. The condition required that there should be given to the secretary within, thirty days “ a particular account of such loss.” The notice was a loss of “ household furniture $367, groceries $233,” the same as in the policy. Held, that the court below properly ruled that this was not a compliance with the condition: held, also, that the question of sufficiency should not have been submitted to the jury.</p> <p>4. To constitute waiver of notice, there should be some official act or declaration of the company during the currency of the time, something from which the insured might reasonably infer that the underwriters did not mean to insist on it.</p> <p>5. Mere silence is not enough to infer waiver.</p> <p>6. After the thirty days without “ a particular account,” nothing but an express agreement with the company would be sufficient.</p> <p>7. Franklin Fire Ins. Co. v. Updegraff, 7 Wright 350, Inland Ins. Co. v. Stauffer, 9 Casey 397, distinguished.</p>