Supreme Court of the United States, 1888

Hosford v. Hartford Fire Insurance

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided May 14, 1888 · Gray

127 U.S. 404; 8 S. Ct. 1202; 32 L. Ed. 198; 1888 U.S. LEXIS 2003 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Mr. T. M. Marguett and Mr. Isham ffeavis for plaintiffs in error,, No counsel appeared for defendant in error.

Cases that cite this one

7 later published cases cite this decision.

Kline Bros. v. Royal Ins. Co. (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York 1911)
Fouts v. Millikan (Ind. Ct. App. 1903)
Phenix Insurance v. Smith (Kan. Ct. App. 1900)
Day v. Hustisford Farmers Mutual Insurance (Wis. 1927)
Kennedy v. London & Lancashire Fire Insurance (Mich. 1909)
Lodge v. Capital Insurance (Iowa 1894)
Small v. Westchester Fire Ins. (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana 1892)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

Mr. Justice Gray,

after stating the case as above reported, delivered the opinion of the court.

In this case, I am instructed by the majority of the court to announce its opinion that the warranty concerning incumbrances includes only incumbrances created by the act or with íhe consent of the assured, and not those created by the law; and therefore the policy was not avoided by the omission to disclose the fact that “ delinquent taxes ” on the premises for previous years were due and unpaid, although by the statutes of Nebraska taxes are made a lien on the real estate taxed.

Judgment reversed, and case remanded to the Circuit Cov/rt, with directions to render judgment for the plaintiffs upon the special verdict.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.