Case ID: ny_233/html/0581-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company of America, Respondent, v. Universal Transportation Co., Inc., Appellant.
    
      Contract — agreement to insure wireless installation rented by defendant from plaintiff'— when plaintiff may recover value on loss of apparatus which defendant failed to insure.
    
    
      Marconi Wireless Tel. Co. v. Universal Transp. Co., Inc., 194 App. Div. 272, affirmed.
    (Argued March 16, 1922;
    decided April 18, 1922.)
    Appeal from a judgment, entered December 15, 1920, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, reversing a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term and directing judgment in favor of plaintiff. The plaintiff and defendant entered into a contract whereby the plaintiff agreed to equip the steamship Hilonian belonging to the defendant with its system of wireless telegraphy and the defendant agreed to pay a stipulated rental therefor. The contract provided that: “ The wireless apparatus shall be insured by the steamship company in favor of the Marconi Company in the sum of $2,000 aga nst all war risks.” The plaintiff installed upon the Hilonian a full set of wireless apparatus and in all respects fulfilled its contract. The defendant failed to insure the wireless apparatus. Within the term of the contract the Hilonian was sunk, and the wireless apparatus was totally lost. The defendant claimed that the plaintiff was not entitled under the above facts to recover the value of the wireless apparatus lost, but that its only remedy was to have insured the apparatus itself and sued for the amount of the premiums paid. The plaintiff claimed that it was entitled to the value of the apparatus lost with interest.
    
      Emilie M. Bullowa for appellant.
    
      Peter F. McAllister and Henry T. Hall for respondent.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ.