Davis v. Phoenix Insurance
Citations
- 111 Cal. 409
- 43 P. 1115
- 1896 Cal. LEXIS 597
Syllabus
<p>Fire Insurance —Ownership of Insured Premises—Condition in Policy—Application Made Part of Policy—Waiver of Condition.— Where a policy of fire insurance is based upon the condition that the insured is the owner in fee simple, hut contains a provision that the application is to be considered a part of the policy, and such application shows clearly that the insured is not the owner in fee simple, the insurer by accepting the risk upon the application waives the condition in the policy as to the title, and cannot set up the want of such fee-simple title to defeat an action on the policy.</p> <p>Id.—Insurable Interest—Equitable Right.—It is not necessary that the insured person have a legal interest in the property insured; hut an equitable interest is sufficient, and it is not requisite that there be a valid equitable title, provided the insured has possession and use, and has a direct pecuniary interest in the preservation of the property, and will suffer a pecuniary loss as an immediate and proximate result of its destruction.</p> <p>Id.—Contract of Sale—Option to Purchase—Extent of Insurable Interest.—One who is in the full possession and enjoyment of property under a contract of sale of the premises by the owner, upon which he has paid part of the purchase price, with an option to complete the purchase, upon the completion of which he would he entitled to a conveyance of the legal title, has an insurable interest in the property; hut his insurable interest is limited to the amount advanced by him upon the option, at the date of the insurance..</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- recognizing “legal 6 title, an equitable title, a lien, [] such other lawful interest” or “[a]ctual possession by 7 consent of the owner” of a property as grounds for insurable interests
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Searls
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
15 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Shade Foods, Inc. v. Innovative Products Sales & Marketing, Inc.California Court of Appeal· 2000-03-29· cited 277×
- Fraser-Yamor Agency, Inc. v. County of Del NorteCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1977-03-17· cited 84×
- Banerian v. O'MALLEYCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1974-10-23· cited 50×
- California Food Service Corp. v. Great American InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1982-04-20· cited 39×
- Russell v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court· 1962-10-04· cited 26×
- Walsh v. TadlockNinth Circuit· 1939-05-24· cited 19×
- Burns v. California Fair Plan Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2007-06-25· cited 13×
- Royal Insurance Company, Limited, a Foreign Corporation v. The Sisters of the Presentation, a California CorporationNinth Circuit· 1970-09-17· cited 12×
- Bright v. Hanover Fire InsuranceWashington Supreme Court· 1907-12-10· cited 12×
- McAdam v. State National InsuranceS.D. California· 2014-06-19· cited 2×
- Abbey Co., LLC v. Lexington InsuranceNinth Circuit· 2008-07-25· cited 1×
- Wexler v. Cal. Fair Plan AssociationCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2021-04-14
- Wexler v. Cal. Fair Plan AssociationCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2021-04-19
- Wexler v. Cal. Fair Plan AssociationCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2021-04-26
- Lane v. FerrariCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1961-01-24
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Liverpool & London & Globe Insurance v. EndeTexas Supreme Court· 1885-11-13· cited 62×
- Tyler v. Ætna Fire InsuranceNew York Supreme Court· 1834-10-15· cited 35×
- Smith v. Phœnix InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court· 1891-09-21· cited 26×
- Crescent Insurance v. CampTexas Supreme Court· 1888-10-19· cited 21×
- Germania Fire Insurance v. HickIllinois Supreme Court· 1888-06-16· cited 18×
Other cases named Davis v. Phoenix Insurance
2 other CourtListener records share this case name.
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.