Summary
finding in favor of insurance company and holding "the fact that there may have been no causal relation between the violation and the loss is wholly without bearing on the question of whether plaintiff breached the conditions"
Summary of this case from Custom Container Sols. v. Century Sur. Co.Opinion
April 26, 1962.
May 21, 1962.
Insurance — Theft insurance — Policy — Terms — Construction — Conditions precedent.
In this action of assumpsit upon a policy insuring plaintiff against loss directly caused by theft, in which it appeared that the policy provided "In consideration of the rate at which this Insurance is written, it is a condition precedent to the liability of the Insurer hereunder . . . that all the Babaco equipment protecting the cargo compartment of each vehicle equipped as aforesaid shall be in the `on' position while merchandise is contained in said compartment except with respect to any . . . trailer . . . which is actually being loaded, and/or unloaded" and further provided "Failure of the insured to comply with any of the foregoing conditions precedent in any instance shall render the policy null and void"; and it affirmatively appeared in the plaintiff's case in chief that while the plaintiff's tractor-trailer was parked on the street waiting to be unloaded and with the sealed load alarm in the "off" position two armed robbers stole the tractor-trailer containing the cargo, it was Held that (1) plaintiff's noncompliance with the condition precedent rendered the policy void, (2) the doctrine of substantial compliance was inapplicable to the facts, and (3) the court below had properly entered judgment non obstante veredicto for the defendant.
Before BELL, C. J., MUSMANNO, JONES, COHEN, EAGEN and O'BRIEN, JJ.
Appeal, No. 177, Jan. T., 1962, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County, Nov. T., 1960, No. 106, in case of Blue Ridge Textile Co., Inc. v. The Travelers Indemnity Company. Judgment affirmed.
Same case in court below: 27 Pa. D. C.2d 55.
Assumpsit. Before BARTHOLD, P. J.
Verdict entered for plaintiff, defendant's motion for judgment non obstante veredicto granted and judgment entered for defendant. Plaintiff appealed.
William E. Young, with him Edmund P. Turtzo, for appellant.
James B. McGiffert, with him Fackenthal, Teel McGiffert, for appellee.
Judgment affirmed on opinion of President Judge WILLIAM G. BARTHOLD, 27 Pa. D. C.2d 55.