Skip to main content
· 11/28/1884

Tischler v. Cal. Farmers' Mut. Fire Ins. Co.

Citations

  • 66 Cal. 178
  • 4 P. 1169
  • 1884 Cal. LEXIS 721

Syllabus

<p>■ Insurance Policy—Application for Insurance.—In an action upon a fire insurance policy, the plaintiff need not allege in his complaint the terms of the application for insurance, when the application was verbal, and was not required by the provisions of the policy to be in writing.</p> <p>Id.—Pleading—Incrkvse of Risk—Defense.—Where a clause of a policy provides that it shall be void, “ if the risk be increased by any means, ” the fact that there was an increase of risk by the act of the assured is an affirmative defense, and must be set up in the answer.</p> <p>Id.—Stipulation against Gunpowder—Eirewoeks.—The plaintiff kept fireworks upon the insured premises; Held, that this was not a violation of a clause of the policy prohibiting the keeping or using of gunpowder upon the premises.</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • remanding case for reconsideration where trial court failed to properly determine whether a change of circumstances had occurred that might justify a child support modification

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Ross

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.