Wolfe v. Howard Insurance Company

Wolfe v. Howard Insurance Company. Insurance against fire. — Measwre of damages. Insurers of goods in the public stores, are liable for their value, in case of loss, though the duties have not been paid or secured, where the policy provides that the loss shall be estimated according to the true and actual cash value of the property. Wolfe v. Howard Insurance Co., 1 Sandf. 124, affirmed. Appeal from the general term of the Superior Court of the city of New York where judgment had been entered upon a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. (Reported below, 1 Sandf. 124.) This was an action upon a policy of insurance, whereby the defendants, on the 8th November 1844, insured the plaintiff against loss or damage by fire, to the extent of $8000, upon a large quantity of wines and distilled spirits, which were deposited in the public stores in Beaver street, in the city of New York, and were consumed by the great fire of July 1845. * 584 1 the provisions of the policy, the defendant agreed “ to make good unto the said assured, his executors, administrators and assigns, all such loss or damage, not exceeding in amount the sum insured, as shall happen by fire to the property, as above specified, from the eighth day of November, one thousand eight hundred and forty-four (at 12 o’clock at noon), until the full end and term of one year thence next ensuing, which term will expire on the eighth day of November, one thousand eight hundred and forty-five (at 12 o’clock at noon), the said loss and damage to be estimated according to the true and actual cash value of the said property, at the time the same shall happen.” On the trial, the court charged the jury, in substance, that the plaintiff was entitled to recover the cash value of the property destroyed, although the duties had not been paid or secured; to which the counsel for the defendant excepted. There was a verdict, accordingly, for the plaintiff; and the judgment entered thereon having been affirmed at general term, the defendant took this appeal. [MAJORITY — Jewett, J.] Jewett, J. (after stating the facts.) — The measure of damages decided by the judge to be correct, was the same upon which the parties had agreed in their contract, and is plainly the true measure. If the plaintiff had been in debt for the purchase-money, to the full value of the goods, it might, upon the principle contended for here by the defendant, as well be contended that he was not entitled to recover anything. There is no error in the judgment, and it should be affirmed. Judgment affirmed.-