Fritz v. Lebanon Mut. Ins.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania February 20, 1893

Fritz v. Lebanon Mut. Ins., 154 Pa. 384 (Pa. 1893)

26 A. 7; 1893 Pa. LEXIS 899

Cueiam, Dean, McCollum, Mitchell, Paxson, Sterrett

Opinion of the Court

Pee Cueiam,

The first four specifications of error are not assigned according to our rules.

The remaining specifications all bear upon the question, whether there was a waiver by the company of the provision in its policy which required proofs of loss to be furnished within fifteen days after the notice of loss. This was the pivotal point in the case. Without going into the details of the evidence, we think there was sufficient upon this point to go to the jury, and that it was properly submitted.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name: Fritz v. Lebanon Mut. Ins. Co.
Cited By: 3 cases
Status: Published
Syllabus: Fire Insurance — Proof of loss — Waiver—Evidence. The fact that a fire insurance company appointed an adjuster to adjust a loss, and that when an adjustment was made it was received by the company without objection, is sufficient evidence to submit to the jury on the question whether the company had waived a provision in the policy requiring proof of loss to be furnished within fifteen days. Assignments of error to admission of evidence. An assignment o'f error to the admission of evidence which quotes the bill of exception but not the evidence is not in proper form and will not be considered by the Supreme Court.