Loew v. North British & Mercantile Ins.
Opinion of the Court
The plaintiff sues for the unearned premium on an insurance policy issued by defendant to him. Plaintiff tendered the return of a certificate of insurance held by him. This certificate shows : “Loss, if any, payable to Lawyers’ Mortgage Company, mortgagee,” etc.
As the interest of the mortgagee in the policy was one which could not be affected without its consent, it should, to say the least, have been made a party to the action. Lewis v. London & Lancashire Fire Ins. Co., 78 Misc. Rep. 176, 137 N. Y. Supp. 887.
Judgment reversed, with $30 costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs.
LEHMAN, J., concurs.
Concurring Opinion
(concurring). I concur in the result, but I am unwilling to accede to the proposition that the mortgagee must be a party to the action. This is an action at law. It might be necessary for the insured to prove that the mortgagee had no further interest in the policy, and in that event I do not think it is necessary to make him a
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.