85 Iowa 643 | Iowa | 1892
The policy under which the insurance is claimed ran to John Fitzsimmons and the plaintiff, and'was for one thousand dollars upon a frame building, and for five hundred dollars upon furniture, wearing apparel, etc., contained therein. The plaintiff filed her petition in the usual form, asking for one thousand, five hundred dollars upon said policy, and alleging the assignment to her of the claim of John Fitzsimmons and the due performance by her of all the conditions of the policy; that the value of the personal property destroyed was one thousand, two hundred dollars and the value of the building two thousand dollars; and attached to her petition a copy of the policy and of the proofs of loss. The defendant, in its answer, admits its corporate capacity, and that it issued the policy sued upon, and denies all other allegations in the plaintiff’s petition. It also pleaded that since the commencement of the action the,, claim under the policy against it had been settled, and the sum agreed upon, two hundred dollars, paid to the plaintiff; also that the policy was procured by fraud and misrepresentation by the plaintiff' and her agents; that said building was then used as a private dwelling house, and that it would be used for no other purpose during the continuance of the policy, and especially that said building was not then used, and should not
I. It is said that the court erred in sustaining the demurrer to the third and sixth counts of the answer.
II. The plaintiff, on cross-examination, was asked questions relating to officers having searched the house
IY. The witness, Myers, was asked if Mrs. Martin informed him at the time the policy was issued that the
YI. Complaint is made because the court sustained objections to questions asked witnesses Camp-
YII. Error is alleged in refusing to give the first instruction asked by the defendant, and in giving the
IX. Counsel urges that the court erred in refusing to give the jury the second and fifth instructions asked
X. Exception is taken to the ninth instruction given by the court, the latter part of which reads as.
XI. The fifteenth instruction tells the jury that the amount stated in the policy is ¡prima facie evidence
We have examined the other errors assigned, and find no ground for complaint on part of the defendant. For the errors of the court heretofore mentioned, the judgment of the district court must be reversed.