New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-07-26
TEST SUIT
FRISCO 'QU1KE CASE HERE
VIII Settle Question of Liability
Where Com pQnieS ReinSure.

An action has been filed in the United States
Circuit Court by tho legal firm OF Sullivan &
Cromwell. OF this city, representing NJ J. Bradon-
stein Co. Of San Francisco. against the Hell
Vetia Swiss Fire Insurance Company. OF Switzer-
land. to recover s35.523 q.
The litigation arises out of the San Francisco
earthquake. and raises the question the liability
or insurance companies carrying reinsurance. 1t is
understood that the will establish a precedent
and that the payment OF many thousands OF dol
lars Of policies depends upon its final decision,
According 20 the complaint. Brandcnstein & Co.
carried policies Of Insurance. aEsreEatin S34 800 in
the Rhine and MoseIle Fire Insurance Company OF
Strashurg. foreign corporation doing business In
this country only in California. The Rhine and
Moselle company. II Is alleged. rensured 50 per
cent Of its California business with the Telvetia
company
After the earthquake the Rhine and Mosene
company declined 10 pay the losses. upon the
ground that the policies contained clause which
absolved Il from ali liability in OF earth
quakes The San Francisco Arm sued the Rhine
and Mossle company for the face value OF the
1880 policies. and recovered Judgment for that
cum and interest, amounting 10 E5.523 81 IN all Tho
Judgment not satisfied the Rhine and Mo
selle company had no property within the jurs-
dictiOn Of the California courts. but under a pro-
vision OF the federal statutes creditor has tho
right 10 attach the property Of n third party In
dobted 70 the individual corporation. against
which the original judgment is obtained.
II IS said that by reason Of It's reinsurance OF "a
per cent Of the Rhine and Moselle compauy's bust
ness the Helvetia company became Indebted TO
the former corporation in a sum exceeding that
EN- firm is now attempting 20 enforce the coIlec-
ton Of its 1880 policies against the Helvetia
pany in New York.
The company some years ago filed Its ccrtiAca-
ton with the Superintendent of Insurance 4 New
York. Otto Kelsey. and was authorized 20 DO bust
in tho state. In all. It is said, $4,000
deposited by the Helveta company in the United
States required by law To guarantee the pay
Of policies by a foreign corporation. Tho
OF 500 90 II IS said, has been deposited with
state insurance officials OF New York by the
company.
An attorney OF San Francisco obtained judy
ments in the courts OF California against the
Rhine and 3foEelle company for $4,000. with
claims OF $4,000 additional yet 10 be litigated
II Is not thought by legal insurance experts that
these judgments be enforced In Germany
against the Rhine and MoselIe company. because Of
It's earthquake clause. but that by reason OF It's
acceptance OF % per OF the Rhine and Mosello
company's business reinsurance the Heyetia
company is directly liable.
Upon the final outcome Of this suit. It Is said
depends the attempted enforcement OF large
number OF California policies In other insurance
companies. the payment OF which vas refused be
cause of earthquake clauses, but being re!nsursd
in other insurance corporations IL is claimed the
latter concerns be forced 10 Nquidate the poll