Gaskill v. Northern Assurance Co.

Citations

• 73 Wash. 668
• 132 P. 643
• 1913 Wash. LEXIS 1657

Syllabus

<p>Insurance Policy — Mistake—Knowledge oe Agent — When Imputed to Company. Liability upon a policy of fire insurance cannot be avoided by the fact that the policy was by the agent inadvertently written in the name of the husband of the plaintiff, while the property insured was her separate property, where the agent writing the policy had knowledge of the true ownership, acquired almost simultaneously with the writing of the policy.</p> <p>Insurance — Policy—Mistake—Reformation. Reformation of a policy of insurance will be decreed, where by the inadvertent mistake of the agent, having full knowledge of the facts, a policy upon the separate property of the wife was issued in the name of the husband, and the company was paid and retained the premiums.</p> <p>Appeal — Review—Harmless Error — Issues and Proof. In the absence of a claim of surprise, a judgment treating a policy of insurance as reformed to correct a mistake, by allowing recovery thereon by the wife, although the policy was issued to the plaintiff, is not error, where evidence was admitted at the trial warranting the reformation, although it was not pleaded, especially where there was no showing of prejudice; since the policy could be enforced without reformation on the ground that the husband took it as agent or trustee of his wife.</p>