Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1905-11-18
FROM THE LAW COURT.
Rescript in Waldo County Case Re
latng to Insurance Matters.

Charles w. Jones, clerk of courts
Friday, received Il rescript from the
law court in the Waldo county case OF
Willis j. Knowlton versus Patrons
Androscoggin Mutual Fire Insurance
co.
The rescript, drawn by Justic.
WhitehouSe, is as follows:
This is an action upon policy Of
fire insurance in the standard form
issued by the defendant company up-
on the buildings of the plaintiff, Sit :
uated in MOntville
THE Legislative enactment Of 1895
chap. Is, prescribed q form for a stan
dard policy of insurance. prohibited
insurance companies doing business
IN this state from issuing policies of
ire Insurance in any other form and by
section Of the act expressly repealed
all provisions of law Inconsistent wit
the terms Of the policy thus enacted.
This standard policy, by its terms. is
declared void il the premises become
vacant by the removal OF the owner
or occupant, and 50 remain vacant ioi
more than 30 days, without tn. as
sent in writing CT iii print Of the
company, irrespective OF the question
whether such vacancy materilliy i'll
ion is clearly inconsistent with Iii.
Statute of 1888, declaring that a
change in the occupation Of tie prop
erty should not affect the puii'y an
|, IS i; is materially increased the FISH
Fhe earlier enactment Of 1883 was
therefore expressly repealed ~ In"
terms of section three Of chaDrrr f>9
of the laws Of, 1895.
Nor is the Question Of material in
crease of the risk from vacancy vi
non occupancy open under the proviS-
ions of the standard policy itself as
prescribed by Chapter Is of The laws
Of 1895.
Furthermore, in the case at bar.
Ties" provisions Of the standard policy
relating 10 the vacancy Of the prom
iSes. are modified by the separate
slip or rider attached to the policy ac-
cOrding to the general authority there
for given by section ! OF Chapter ~,
K. S. Ely this modified :ontrlc; the
parties definitely stipulated liiaI Re
policy should be rendered void for
vacancy or nOn-occupancy continued
for more than 10 days. This is The
contract which the parties themselves
made and the court is not authorized
to substitute, for il 2noth"c ana a
different contract which The Ya ties
did not make.
In the case at bar the property in
sured. a set of connected farm build
ings situated about one mile from
Liberty Village where the plaintiff re-
sided, was destroyed by fire April 10,
1903. The house was not occupied by
the plaintiff himself, but hai been oc-
cupied by his tenant, Albarc Turner
and his family. A stock of cattle and
also some hay and farming tools. Ill"
property of the clam;im, We're kept in
the barn ana cared for ~ Turrtr.
ON the 28th day If March proceeding
the fire, Turner nr"1 tenant in Lib
erty Village ana removed from III"
fouse i'll question sufficient furniture
and goods to furnish it. ON the fourth
day of April following, his wife ana
family moved into the tenement in
Liberty Village, but hr continued to
ray rent for the pltmiiff'S house up
to the time Of the fire. He continued
to wcrk upon the farm pleasant lays.
leaving his family in the Village in
the morning, taking his dinner with
him to the farm. ana returning to his
family in the Village at night. Rainy
days and Sundays. he was not at he
farm. ON theS" days the stock was
cared for by u n"ighbor, one Weed.
Turner WAS net at tie farm on the
day OF the fiir. Weed caring for the
stock OH that day. He intended e