Skip to main content
· 12/18/1894

Caledonian Insurance v. Traub

Citations

  • 80 Md. 214
  • 30 A. 904
  • 1894 Md. LEXIS 132

Syllabus

<p>Fire Insurance — Appraisal of Loss — Waiver of Preliminary Proof-Demand — Instructions on Segregated Facts — Pleading.</p> <p>In an action on a written, contract, it is admissible in evidence if set forth in the declaration according to its legal effect.</p> <p>Where a policy of fire insurance provided that in the event of a loss and a disagreement between the insured and the company as to the amount of the loss, the question should be submitted to appraisers, and a submission and award have been made in pursuance of the provision, then the same are admissible in evidence, and a witness should be allowed to identify them.</p> <p>In such case, if the appraisers have properly performed their duties, the award is binding upon both parties.</p> <p>A jury is authorized to find that the insurer waived the preliminary proof of loss required by the policy; if they find that the defendant company was notified of the loss, and that its agents visited the premises, took possession of the property, retaining it for several days, and subsequently offered to pay plaintiff the amount of an award, and denied its liability on other grounds than the absence of proof of loss.</p> <p>A party has a right to ask for an instruction upon segregated portions of the evidence, but the conclusions arrived at must be consistent with the truth of all the other facts in evidence.</p> <p>Therefore, in an action on a policy of fire insurance where there is evidence from which the jury may infer that the defendant had waived the preliminary proofs of loss of the character required by the policy, a prayer instructing the jury that the plaintiff cannot recover unless such preliminary proof was furnished, is erroneous.</p> <p>And a prayer in such case instructing the jury that the plaintiff cannot recover if he did not furnish the preliminary proof of loss required by the policy, unless the jury find that the defendant waived compliance with the policy, is erroneous, because it submits a question of

Judges: Boyd, Bryan, Fowler, McSherry, Robinson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.