20 Ohio Law Abs. 26

DRUCKER v TRAVELERS INS CO et

Ohio Appeals, 1st Dist, Butler Co

No 627.

Decided March 9, 1935

John D. Andrews, Hamilton, Oliver M. Dock, Cincinnati, and Albert F. Weinstein, Cincinnati, for plaintiff in error.

Harry S. Wonneli, Hamilton; for-defendant in error, The Travelers Insurance Co:

*27OPINION

By ROSS, PJ.

The defendant Insurance Company introduced evidence that the form of the policy used by the company during the period when the policy was issued to Dutcher, contained a clause requiring notice of claims and suits against the insured to be given promptly to the Insurance Coraoany. This was the best evidence obtainable, in view of the destruction of the policy. A form as testified to was offered in evidence.

The insured having failed to comply with the terms of the contract, upon which the plaintiff seeks to recover, the court was justified in dismissing the Insurance Company, and the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas is affirmed.

MATTHEWS and HAMILTON, JJ, concur.

Drucker v. Travelers Ins
20 Ohio Law Abs. 26

Case Details

Name
Drucker v. Travelers Ins
Decision Date
Mar 9, 1935
Citations

20 Ohio Law Abs. 26

Jurisdiction
Ohio

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!