2 Cai. Cas. 324 | N.Y. Sup. Ct. | 1796
The very statement of the question implies it to be admitted by the parties, and which is certainly the case, that the only question between them is, whether the loss is to be deemed a total loss, or only a partial or average loss of the chariot ? By the express terms of the policy, jettison was one of the perils which the insurer took upon himself; but at the same time the insurance being also expressly free of average, the jettison must not be a partial or average loss only, but must amount to a total loss of the thing insured, so that the inquiry (and which is impliedly admitted in the question submitted to the court as stated between the parties) is, had the plaintiff a right to abandon to the defendant the remaining parts of the chariot which were saved, and sue as for a total loss ? My opinion is, that he had.
The part lost exceeded more than half the value of the whole chariot, the thing insured. The box being lost, the chariot cannot, with any propriety, be considered so to have arrived in specie as that it required to be repaired only to have again become a whole chariot. With respect to a chariot and every other wheel-carriage having a box, the seats for the persons to be conveyed, wheels, the perch with the axle-trees, springs and other parts affixed to it, and the pole or shafts are sometimes collectively denominated the carriage-part, as distinguished from the box and its immediate fixtures. If a wheel, or any other part of the carriage-part should be lost, or be so
Judgment for the plaintiff.