Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1909-07-02
In theSuprerneC Court
Filed July I, 1909.
The TayIor-BaIdwin Co., respondent,
vs.. Northwestern Fire e. Marine Co.;

The TayIor-BaidWtn Co., respondent,
vs.. Northwestern Fire & Marine Co.;
appellant.
Plaintiff, Taylor-Baldwin Co., a cor
poration, was the owner Of building
and stock of goods in what is called
the old town of G, which it insured
in the defendant company. Afterwards
and contrary to the provisions Of the
policy, it removed the property in
sured to the new town of G, four miles
distant, obtained additional insurance
and installed gasoline lighting plant.
After the removal to the new location
the plaintiff delivered the policy to
one Robinson, who was the legal so
Letting agent Of the defendant, and
requested him to have the insurance
company make an Endorsement on the
policy to cover the property at its new
location. Through a misunderstand-
ing Robinson sent the policy to
defendant at its home Office, with the
written request that it cancer the
same, which the company did, and re-
tanned the policy, but did not notify
the plaintiff The building and stock
of merchandise were afterwards de-
stroyed by fire, caused by the gasoline
lighting plant. The plaintiff made
proofs of loss and sent them to de-
PENDANT. The proofs showed that the
property was destroyed at its new To-
cation; the amount of additional in
surance obtained and that the fire was
caused by defective gasoline lighting
plant. The company returned the
proofs with letter denying liabil-
ity. on the ground that the policy
had been cancelled before the fire.
Held, that the rejection Of the claim
on the ground stated in defendants
letter did not constitute a waiver of
the conditions Of the policy.
(Syllabus by the court.)
Appeal from the district court, OF
Grand Forks county, Chas. F. Tenn
pleton, judge.
Action by Taylor-Baldwin Co.. VS..
Northwestern Fire & Marine Insur-
ance Co. From judgment in favor
of plaintiff, defendant appeals. Re-
versed.
Ball, Wctson, Young and Hardy, for
appellant. -.
w. s. stambaugh. for respondent
Opinion of the court by Carmody,
All concur, except Morgan, c.. ].
not participating.
Olivia sjoIi, appellant, vs.. e. K. Hog
enson, ct al, respondents. .
This action is brought upon an ad-
illustrators bond, filed by one G.. r.
Gollickson, in the county court OF
Walsh county, as administrator Of the
estate of Christian Gunderson, de-
ceased The suit is brought to re-
cover a balance claimed to be, due
plaintiff as heir at law of said &C.
Gunderson, deceased. decreed to her
by a final decree of distribution made
by said county court. " +
Held, that final decree of distrib-
ution entered by county courts in this
state distributing the estate of a de-
ceased person to the heirs at law, Is
of equal rank with the judgments en-
tered BY courts OF record in this state,
and that a distributee named in said
final decree of distribution can main
tain an action against the executor or
administrator, or the bondsman of
the execptor or administrator, or
both, for the share assigned to said
distributes by the said final decree OF
distribution. ~. = %
Such final decree of distribution IL
conclusive AZ against the bondsmen
as we'll as the administrator; and i'm
ports the same degree of verify o,
judgments entered by courts of record
in this state. - NJ. ,,g: H. !.
A. receipt obtained from distribu-s
tee through fraud and misrepresenta-
ton is invalid and open to explanation
and impeachment 4,.-..o .sl
A payment means a payment In
money. II paid by promisory note or
anything else than cash, 1t must be
accepted by the payees as payment.
Held. under the evidence In this
case, that the so-called promissory
note given by the administrators to
plaintiffs husband, did not constitute
q navmert All. = gisll9s 49,, Is s.
(Syllabus by the court.) s5f5
Appeal from the district court OF
Walsh county, w. ]. Kneeshaw,
Judge. III Z s5t !. 81 @z..
From Judgment in favor Of de-