The facts in this case are the same as in the preceding case; and the defenses set up that the risk was increased with the knowledge of the assured, of which no notice was given to the defendant; that the assured allowed the building to become vacant and unoccupied, without notice Lo¡the *236defendant; and that, being a manufacturing establishment, it ceased to be operated without the consent of the defendant. I have already passed upon these defenses in the preceding case, and therefore the finding will be for the plaintiff.
33 F. 235
Brighton Manuf’g Co. v. Reliance Ins. Co.
(Circuit Court, N. D. Illinois.
July 25, 1887.)
At Law. Suit to recover on a policy of insurance.
Action by the Brighton Manufacturing Company against the Reliance Insurance Company on a policy of insurance,.
M. W. Russell, for plaintiff.
Gary, Cody & Gary and Fred’It Oilman, for defendant.
Brighton Manuf'g Co. v. Reliance Ins.
33 F. 235
Case Details
33 F. 235
References
Nothing yet... Still searching!
Nothing yet... Still searching!