Ziegler v. Akin Ziegler v. Akin

Ziegler v. Akin

1958.C10.40028 261 F.2D 88

    • USD 0.99
    • USD 0.99

Descripción editorial

Federal Mutual Implement & Hardware Insurance Company brought this declaratory judgment action for a determination of its liability under a multiple peril insurance policy which it had issued to the defendant, Fairfax Equipment Company, Inc. The defendant-insured operated a farm equipment and automobile business at three different locations in Fairfax, Oklahoma. The policy insured against loss to the merchandise placed at these three locations, but fixed a separate limit of coverage for each location. A fire destroyed the building and contents at the location having a coverage of $35,000, causing a loss of approximately $60,000. The insurer contended below that its liability could not exceed this $35,000 limit. The insureds theory was that the insurance coverage agreed to by it and the general agent of the insurer contemplated only one limit of coverage applicable to all the merchandise, wherever located, and that in any event, the $35,000 limit was not in force at the time of the fire because of an oral agreement entered into by the president of the insured and the agent of the insurer after the issuance of the policy. A jury returned a verdict for the insured in the total amount of the loss.

GÉNERO
Técnicos y profesionales
PUBLICADO
1958
15 de noviembre
IDIOMA
EN
Inglés
EXTENSIÓN
10
Páginas
EDITORIAL
LawApp Publishers
VENDEDOR
Innodata Book Distribution Services Inc
TAMAÑO
53
KB

Más libros de United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit

United States v. Bellamy United States v. Bellamy
2005
Palladium Music, Inc. v. Eatsleepmusic Palladium Music, Inc. v. Eatsleepmusic
2005
E.Spire Communications, Inc. v. New Mexico Public Regulation Commission E.Spire Communications, Inc. v. New Mexico Public Regulation Commission
2004
Young v. Workman Young v. Workman
2004
Johnson v. Lodge #93 of the Fraternal Order of Police Johnson v. Lodge #93 of the Fraternal Order of Police
2004
D.L. v. Unified School District No. 497 D.L. v. Unified School District No. 497
2004