Brenn v. Farmers Alliance Insurance

Citations

• 103 Kan. 517
• 175 P. 383
• 1918 Kan. LEXIS 311

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Mutual Fire Insurance — On Live Stock — Construction of Policy— Risk on Each Animal Separately. A by-law of a mutual fire insurance company is held to mean that where a policy is written on live stock, and the risk on each head is not otherwise stated, each is to be* regarded as separately insured for a numerically proportional part of the entire amount named.</p> <p>2. Same — Oral Agreement Contradicting Contract Inadmissible. The rule which denies effect to an oral agreement so far as it contradicts a written contract entered into at the same time or later, is one not merely of evidence, but of- substantive law.</p> <p>3. Same — Mistaken Opinion of Soliciting Agent — Not a Basis for Reformation of Policy. Where the statute provides that the by-laws of a-mutual insurance company shall be made a part of every policy issued, the fact that the agent who solicited the insurance made an. incorrect statement concerning the force of a by-law, through a mistaken opinion as to its meaning, will not form a basis for a refprmation of the contract to conform to such erroneous conception.</p> <p>4. Same — Effect of Change in By-law. A change in such by-law, by the elimination of a provision that in no event should the company’s liability exceed the market value of the animal lost, is held not to have had any effect upon the rights of the parties involved in this action.</p>