Nixon

Nixon v. Indemnity Insurance

Good Law
117 Cal. App. 410·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 547·3 P.2d 968
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 8, 1931Docket No. 7751.California789 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Tyler, J.

Action upon a policy of insurance issued by defendant company which insured plaintiffs against loss by burglary, theft, larceny or robbery of any of the property covered by the policy. Plaintiffs sued upon the instrument to recover the value of a diamond pin containing fourteen diamonds, which, they alleged was feloniously taken and stolen from their residence. Judgment was prayed for in the sum of one thousand dollars. Trial was had before the court and a jury, which resulted in a verdict in favor of plaintiffs in the sum of one thousand dollars, and costs. From such judgment this appeal is taken.

The main point urged for reversal is that the evidence does not establish a burglary of respondents’ house’ or a theft of the jewelry. No direct evidence of the stealing of the pin was offered by plaintiffs, the only evidence in the case being indirect and circumstantial in character. This evidence, however, in our opinion, is sufficient to' give rise to the reasonable inference or probability that the disappearance of the pin was occasioned by felonious taking, and justifies the conclusion of the jury to that effect. It shows in substance that plaintiff Josephine Nixon last saw the…

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.