Reports of the Cases Decided in the Appellate Court of Indiana Volume 69

Reports of the Cases Decided in the Appellate Court of Indiana Volume 69

By (author) 

List price: US$22.40

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

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. 1920 edition. Excerpt: ...York v. Sun Ins. C0. (1916), 66 Ind. App. 269, 113 N. E. 1021. The unpaid premium thereby became simply a debt due appellant from the insured, to be collected like any other debt. Ohio Farmers' Ins. Co. v. Stowman (1896), 16 Ind. App. 205, 44 N. E. 558, 940. Under such circumstances a failure to pay the premium would not work a forfeiture of the policy in the absence of a provision to that efiect. Ohio Farmers' Ins. 9. Co. v. Stowman, supra. The briefs do not disclose that the policy contains any provision in that regard, and this court will not search the 10. record for errors on which to base a reversal. Chicago, etc., R. C0. v. Roth (1915), 59 Ind. App. 161, 107 N. E. 689, 108 N. E. 971. Appellant, having waived its right to require the payment of the first annual premium before the policy became effective, cannot reclaim it and predicate a defense thereon. Bishop, Contracts (2d ed.) 792. Under these circumstances it does not appear that appellee's right to recovery depends on the actual payment of 11. said first annual premium, and hence any statement in that regard, if unauthorized, was harmless. The conclusions of law, properly 12. stated on the facts found, fully justify the judgment rendered. When this is true the statement of other conclusions of law, if erroneous, is not reversible error. Hilbish v. Hattle (1895), 145 Ind. 59, 44 N. E. 20, 33 L. R. A. 783; Cobu-rn V. Sands (1897)', 150 Ind. 141, 48 N. E. 786; White v. Chicago, etc., R. C0. (1890), 122 Ind. 317, 23 N. E. 782, 7 L. R. A. 257; Cumberland Tel., etc., Co. v. Kranz (1911), 48 Ind. App. 67, 95 N. E. 371; Daily V. Smith (1918), 66 Ind. App. 383, 118 N. E. 312. We find no reversible error in the record. Judgment affirmed. 1....show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 256 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 14mm | 463g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236894278
  • 9781236894274