1 Johns. Cas. 337 | N.Y. Sup. Ct. | 1800
In the present case there is no warranty, either express or implied, nor any representation that the ship- or goods were neutral property ; and besides the usual risks, inserted in printed policies, this .policy declares that the insurance is to be “ against all risks.”
-Much reiiahce was placed by the defendant’s counsel on the-extra‘bill offfiading, annexed to the plaintiff’s affidavit,, and found among the ship’s papers which, it was contended,, was false and colorable, and tended to enhance the risk. • We think'it could not have that effect. On the face of the pa
We are, therefore, of opinion, that the plaintiff is entitled to recover.
■ Judgment for the plaintiff.
By the statement'pf facts in this ease it appears that these wprds were written. Upon the construction of policies of insurance, Lord Ellenborough, remarks, in the case of Robertson v. French, 4 East, 135, ‘‘ that the greater part of the printed language of them,being invariable and uniform has acquired from-Use and practice a known and. definite meaning, and that the words superadded in writing (subject, indeed always to be governed in point of construction by the language and terms'with which they are accompanied), are entitled nevertheless, if there should.be any reasonable doubt Upon the sense ánd meaning of the-whole, to have a greater effect, attributed to them than to the .printed words, inasmuch as the written words are the immediate language and terms-selected by. the. parties themselves for the expression of their meaning, and the printed words are a general formula adapted equally to-their case, and that of all other contracting parties upon similar occasions and subjects.”