Lighthouse Legend

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1905 edition. Excerpt: ...by its voluntary act destroyed the evidence of damage and made a legal appraisal an impossibility." In reply to this last letter the attorney for insured wrote the company demanding an appraisal, and stating that if the company did not accede to the demand suit would be commenced upon the policy. To this last letter the company replied that they had nothing further to say; and that "you will, of course, take such action as you may deem justifiable in the premises." Hrld, That this evidence showed a waiver of the appraisal and award. Judgment for company below. Here reversed against company. O'Rourke v. German Ins. Co. of Freeport (Minn. S. C.): The evidence justified the jury in finding that the fire was not caused by the instrumentality of the insured, and that he did not fail to make reasonable effort to save the property insured. Same--Evidence: The court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to receive evidence to the effect that the insured had scattered oil on the walls of his living rooms, situated fifty feet distant from the barn. It was a collateral matter, having no direct bearing on the point at issue. Same--Preponderance of Evidence--Instruction: The court instructed the jury that, in considering the defense, they should be satisfied by a preponderance of the evidence that respondent either directly or indirectly caused the fire; and in stating that the court had so often explained to them the meaning of preponderance of the evidence," it was not necessary to dwell upon it. This was not error, for it will be presumed that the jury understood what was meant by a preponderance of the evidence, and, if counsel for appellant had any doubt upon that subject, it was necessary to call special attention...