Western Weekly Reports Volume 4 (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1913 edition. Excerpt: ...Of course, it is quite possible for an insurance company to depart from ordinary business principles and grant or continue an insurance for double the amount of an animal's value. The question is whether the defendant company has in this case done so. In answer to an inquiry put by myself, Mr. Davidson, counsel for Kitching and Kenway, admitted that the strongest evidence he could point to on behalf of his clients was the letter, sent by Craig in the name of Oldfield. Kirby & Gardner to Kenway on the morning of April 16th. Assuming in favor of Kitching and Kenway (but not deciding) that this letter is binding upon the defendant company, I think it entirely fails to establish the defendants' counterclaim. It informs Kenway that the agents "are holding your interest in this insurance fully covered. but subject to the Veterinary Surgeon's report on the stallion and also subject to one-third reduction from the Veterinary Surgeon's quotation of the present market value of the said stallion." It appears to me that this letter entirely confirms the testimony of McMurray and Craig that they were expecting an application from Kitching and Kenway for re-insurance of the stallion. On that day the stallion died, so that the market value of it was absolutely nil. It is absurd to suppose that any re-insurance could have been effected. In my opinion Kitching and Kenway took nothing by the assignment of April 15th, and they never afterwards acquired any rights against the defendant company. Having reached a decision adverse to the counterclaim on the merits, I think it unnecessary to deal with certain formal objections raised by the parties during the argument. judgment will accordingly be entered as follows: (a) In favor...