Martin v. Sun Insurance Office

Citations

• 83 Fla. 325
• 91 So. 363

Syllabus

<p>1. The valued policy statute of this State (Sec. 4281, Revised General Statutes), is not repugnant to the provisions of the Constitution of this State nor of the United States.</p> <p>2. Where several concurrent policies of fire insurance are written upon building's or structures with the knowledge or con-' sent of the several insurers, the aggregate amount of all such policies is the value of the property insured, notwithstanding clauses in such policies purporting to limit liability of the insurer to a less amount.</p> <p>3. The contract between an insurer of real estate and a mortgagee of the insured premises under the standard mortgage clause is independent of the principal contract of insurance contained in the policy between the insurer and the assured owner of the premises and is not subject to forfeiture by reason of any act or omission of the person originally insured'.</p> <p>4. Since the insurer usually selects the language employed, doubtful terms in an insurance policy should be liberally construed in favor of the insured so ag not to defeat, without plain necessity, his indemnity, which in taking the insurance it was his object to secure.</p> <p>5. Under a standard mortgage clause in a fire insurance policy upon real estate providing that the insurance as -to the • interest of the mortgagee shall not be invalidated by any act or neglect of the mortgagor or owner, the mortgagee is not required to accept, in settlement of his claim fqr total loss sustained, less than the amount of hjs policy ■ where the owner, without his knowledge or consent, qbtains additioiial insurance upon the mortgaged property, notwithstanding the mortgage clause contains a provision that the insurer shall not be liable under the policy for a greater proportion of any loss sustained thereunder than the amount of such insurance bears to the whole amount of insurance on the property.</p>