City Fire Insurance v. Mark

Citations

• 45 Ill. 482

Syllabus

<p>1. Insurance—policy of—and, its conditions. M., in the absence of his partner G\\, took a stock of goods on a debt due the firm, and not knowing whether the transaction would meet O.’s approval, had the stock taken to another store, procured a policy of insurance upon it in his own name, and then sold the goods to one Myers, assigning the policy to him by consent of the company indorsed thereon. Shortly after, the goods were burned, and payment of the loss refused, on the ground that the following provision in the policy discharged the company from liability: “Any interest in property insured, not absolute, or that is less than a perfect title, must be specifically represented to the company, and expressed in this policy in writing, otherwise, the insurance shall be void.” Held, that the nature of M.’s interest in the property as between him and his firm, at the time of his sale to Myers, can not be called in question in this suit; that, Myers having acquired an absolute title in the property, the company, by its consent to the assignment, recognized him as the assured party and sole owner of the goods, and thereby waived any right to consider the policy void under such clause, which, as against M., it may have been, had the goods burned before his sale to Myers.</p> <p>2. Same — assignment of policy — op&rates as a new contract. The consent . of the company to the assignment operated as a new insurance to the assignee . of the policy.</p> <p>3. Same—policy of—when applies not only to stock on hand, hut also to new :.goods subsequently added. A policy of insurance on a stock of goods which is • constantly being sold from, and replenished by other goods incorporated into the-stock, covers, not only the original stock, but all such new goods so pur- < chased to replace those sold in the course of trade.</p>