Rasmusson v. North Coast Fire Insurance

Citations

• 83 Wash. 569

Syllabus

<p>Insurance — Fire Insurance — Policy—Fraud — False Representations — Evidence—Sufficiency. In an action upon fire insurance policies, the verdict of the jury to the effect that the plaintiff had not knowingly made any false statements in representing the value of his stock of goods, cannot be disturbed merely because the jury, in answer to special interrogatories, fixed the amount of his loss at about $2,000, the plaintiff claiming $3,000 and the defendants claiming that the loss did not exceed $1,200, where the estimates of experienced adjusters differed widely as to the probable loss and there was no suggestion of fraud or wrongful action in any other particular and no proof that plaintiff knowingly made any false statements.</p> <p>Same —• Action on Policy — Statutory Provisions — Value of Property Lost — Evidence—Admissibility. In an action upon fire insurance policies on a stock of groceries, agents who wrote and issued the policies may be called by the plaintiff to testify to the value of the stock at the time the policies were written and at the time of the fire, under 3 Rem. & Bal. Code, § 6059-105, providing that every agent who issues a fire insurance policy shall be presumed to know the value of the property insured, and shall be punishable by fine in case he knowingly issues policies in excess of the value of the property; the evident purpose of the statute being to prevent over-insurance.</p> <p>Evidence — Rebuttal—Reputation of Deceased Party — Admissibility. In an action upon fire insurance policies, where the defense was that the insured, in making his proofs of loss, swore falsely, and fraudulently and intentionally overstated values and losses with intent to defraud, and where the insured died before the trial, it is admissible, in rebuttal of defendants’ charges, to show the deceased’s reputation for honesty and integrity.</p>