Loring

Loring v. Dutchess Insurance

Good Law
1 Cal. App. 186·1905 Cal. App. LEXIS 75·81 P. 1025
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 16, 1905No. 8.California726 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Allen, J.

Action upon a policy of insurance. Defendant demurred to the second amended complaint on the grounds: 1. That it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action; 2. That there was a misjoinder of parties plaintiff; and 3. That the complaint was ambiguous in various particulars, among which was, that it could not be ascertained therefrom what were the interests of plaintiffs in the property insured. The demurrer was sustained, and upon plaintiffs’ refusal to amend, judgment was entered for defendant. This appeal is from the judgment.

The facts stated in the second amended complaint, so far as material, are: That plaintiff Bunch, having paid the consideration price for certain premises upon which the insured buildings were situated, caused legal title to be taken in his co-plaintiff Loring as security for a loan of five hundred dollars and interest. Thereafter Bunch made application (a copy of which application appears in the complaint) to the agent of the defendant company for a policy of insurance to the amount of eight hundred dollars upon such buildings, and in such application made known the state of title and the relation of the parties thereto, and directed…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.