Western & A. Pipe Lines v. Home Ins.
Citations
- 145 Pa. 346
- 28 W.N.C. 347
- 22 A. 665
- 1891 Pa. LEXIS 672
Syllabus
<p>(a) An insurance company insured a pipe-line company, incorporated under the act of April 29, 1874, P. L. 73, and its supplement, act of June 2, 1883, P. L. 61, against loss or damage by fire “ on oil while contained in ” a certain tank in a specified position on leased lands. A flood carried the tank away from its location to another point on the leased lands, where the oil therein was destroyed by fire:</p> <p>1. The object of the contract was indemnity. With that object in view, the terms of the policy should be construed liberally; and where any doubt exists as to their meaning, it should be resolved in favor of the insured, rather than in the interest of the insurer. Words of the policy susceptible of two interpretations, should be construed to sustain the claim of the insured.</p> <p>2. Moreover, every consideration of public policy demands that insurance companies should be required to deal with their customers with entire frankness; and it is not the province of courts to indulge in conjectures favorable to such insurance companies as are disposed, upon mere technicalities, to avoid the payment of honest claims.</p> <p>3. Tested by these principles, the position that the description of the property insured was, in effect, a warranty that in case of fire the oil destroyed should not only be contained in the iron tank, but that the tank itself should remain where it was when the insurance was effected, otherwise the insurance company would not be liable, was not tenable.</p> <p>4. Assuming that the description of the tank’s location may be regarded as in the nature of a warranty thereof, it can only be construed as a warranty of location when the insurance was effected, and that the tank should not be voluntarily removed by the insured; not an absolute warranty, that it would thereafter remain in the same location.</p> <p>5. The insurer, in a letter written soon after the loss, and in the affidavit of defence filed to the action brought on the policy, havin
Judges: Clare, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Paxson, Sterrett, Their, Williams
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.