TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Royal Ins. Co. v. Story

Royal Ins. Co., Limited v. Story.

Royal Ins. Co. v. Story, 40 So. 2d 724 (Ala. 1949)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Alabama · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 19, 1949
Docket
No. 7 Div. 9.
Judges
Simpson, Brown, Livingston, Stakely
Citations
40 So. 2d 724252 Ala. 2751949 Ala. LEXIS 410

Opinion of the Court — Simpson

SIMPSON, Justice.

The petition for certiorari to the Court of Appeals challenges the opinion of that court in respect to its holding (1) that the provision of the insurance policy that “this policy shall be void if the Insured has concealed or misrepresented any material fact or circumstance concerning this insurance or the subject thereof or in case of any fraud, attempted fraud or false swearing by the Insured- touching any matter relating to this insurance or- the, subject, *276 thereof, whether before or after a loss,” did not apply to false statements by the insured in his testimony in the trial of the case; and (2) in holding that the verdict of the jury was not contrary to the weight of the evidence.

On a careful consideration of the case, we have concluded with the opinion of the Court of Appeals.

In respect to the first ground argued for error, it is conceded that there is a conflict of authority, but the better-reasoned cases, as we view them, affirm the conclusion of the Court of Appeals. Joyce on Insurance, 2d Ed., Vol. 5, § 3344, at p. 5554; Couch’s Cyclopedia of Insurance Law, Vol.

7, p. 5516, § 1557; Insurance Companies v. Weides, 81 U.S. 375 , 14 Wall. 375 , 20 L.Ed. 894 ; Goldberg v. Provident Washington Ins. Co., 144 Ga. 783 , 87 S.E. 1077 ; Third National Bank v. Yorkshire Ins. Co., 218 Mo.App. 660 , 267 S.W. 445 ; Deitz v. Providence Washington Ins. Co., 33 W.Va. 526 , 11 S.E. 50 , 25 Am.St.Rep. 908 ; American Alliance Ins. Co. v. Pyle, 62 Ga.App. 156 , 8 S.E.2d 154 ; Hall v. Merrimack Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 91 N.H. 6 , 13 A.2d 157 .

The second challenge for error is manifestly untenable, since we will not review the findings of the Court of Appeals on the question of the weight of the evidence. Ex parte Wetzel, 243 Ala. 130 , 8 So.2d 824 ; Consford v. State, 200 Ala. 23 , 75 So. 335 .

Writ denied.

BROWN, LIVINGSTON, and STAKELY, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 11 cases

View all citing references →
1951: 21952: 11955: 11956: 11957: 11958: 11965: 11971: 11991: 11994: 119512026peak 1951 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Littlefield v. State63 So. 2d 573 (Ala. 1952)
  2. Thomas v. New Jersey Insurance Underwriting Ass'n649 A.2d 1383 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1994)
  3. Lawhorn v. State89 So. 2d 693 (Ala. 1956)
  4. Morrison v. State100 So. 2d 746 (Ala. 1958)
  5. Rego v. Connecticut Insurance Placement Facility593 A.2d 491 (Conn. 1991)
  6. Lomartira v. American Automobile Insurance Company245 F. Supp. 124 (D. Conn. 1965)

Most recent

  1. Thomas v. New Jersey Insurance Underwriting Ass'n649 A.2d 1383 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1994)
  2. Rego v. Connecticut Insurance Placement Facility593 A.2d 491 (Conn. 1991)
  3. Prosch v. Prosch249 So. 2d 855 (Ala. Civ. App. 1971)
  4. Lomartira v. American Automobile Insurance Company245 F. Supp. 124 (D. Conn. 1965)
  5. Morrison v. State100 So. 2d 746 (Ala. 1958)
  6. American Paint Service, Inc. v. The Home Insurance Company Of New York246 F.2d 91 (3d Cir. 1957)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 8

DepthCaseCited by
Ins. Companies v. Weides, 81 U.S. (14 Wall.) 375 (1872) 79
Deitz v. Prov. Wash. Ins., 11 S.E. 50 (W. Va. 1890) 26
Ex Parte Wetzel, 8 So. 2d 824 (Ala. 1942) 19
Goldberg v. Provident Wash. Ins., 87 S.E. 1077 (Ga. 1916) 19
Am. Alliance Ins. Co. v. Pyle, 8 S.E.2d 154 (Ga. Ct. App. 1940) 18
Hall v. Merrimack Mut. Fire Ins., 13 A.2d 157 (N.H. 1940) 14
Third Nat'l Bank v. Yorkshire Ins., 267 S.W. 445 (Mo. Ct. App. 1924) 10
Consford v. State, 75 So. 335 (Ala. 1917) 4

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list