Exchange Mutual Fire Insurance v. Consolidated Mutual Fire Insurance

Citations

• 46 Pa. Super. 601
• 1911 Pa. Super. LEXIS 320

Syllabus

<p>Insurance — Reinsurance—Contract—Estoppel.</p> <p>1. Where at the time of issuing an insurance policy the company knows that one of the conditions thereof is inconsistent with the facts, and the insured has been guilty of no fraud, the company is estopped from setting up the breach of such condition. This rule is equally applicable to a contract of reinsurance.</p> <p>2. If an insurer be not liable, he cannot recover of the reinsurer.</p> <p>Insurance — Occupation of premises — Future me.</p> <p>3. Where an insurance policy describes the premises as a frame building “occupied for general store purposes,” the policy is not avoided by the fact that at the time of a fire destroying it, it was used “first floor, general store, second floor, lodge,” where there is no warranty in the policy as to future or continued use in the same manner as when insured; and this is particularly so where the policy contains a provision that it shall be void, “if the hazard be increased by any means within the control or knowledge of the insured,” and there is no evidence that the hazard was increased by the use of the second floor as a lodge room.</p>