Kuljis

Union Marine & General Ins. v. Kuljis

Good Law
70 F.2d 231·1934 A.M.C. 679·1934 U.S. App. LEXIS 4110
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 12, 1934No. 7287California1,627 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sawtelle, J.

June 30, 1932, appellant, defendant below, through its duly authorized agent, D. A. Duryee & Co., at Everett, Wash., issued to ap-pellee a marine insurance poliey insuring ap-pellee’s gas boat, the Tiger, against loss by fire. September 14, 1932, the boat was destroyed by fixe, and appellee successfully prosecuted in the District Court this suit to recover the amount of the poliey. Appellant contended in the trial court and contends on this appeal that the poliey ■ was voluntarily canceled by appellee prior to the loss. The trial court’s finding on this issue, assailed by appellant as unsupported by the evidence, is as follows: “That prior to the fire the plaintiff had requested the cancellation of said poliey, but some correspondence arose between the defendant and the plaintiff with relation thereto, and the policy was not can-celled prior to the said fire or at any time.”

The poliey contains the following cancellation clause: “Either party may cancel this policy by giving 10 days’ notice in writing. If cancelled at request of underwriters pro rata daily rates to be made. If cancelled at request of assured, returns to be made on basis of standard short rate scale.”

Prior to…

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.