Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1911-07-21
DakIn '. Queen City Fire Ins. Co.
MultnOmah County.

MultnOmah County,
r. II. Dakln, respondent, Y. Queen
CITY Fire Insurance Co., OF sioux
Falls. South Dakota, corporation,
apnellant. Appeal from the circuit
court for Multnomah county. Hon.
w. n. Gatens, Judge. Argued and
submitted July II, 1911 II. NJ. CAKE
for respondent. w. +. Farrell for ap-
pellant. Moore, J.. Affirmed.
This Is an action to recover the
amount Of an insurance policy. u Is
alleged in the complaint In effect
that defendant Is a corporation and
on June II, 1908, In consideration OF
the payment Of the required pre-
MUM II issued TO plalntih a policy
stipulating 10 indemnify him against
injury by FIRE, occurring within a year,
TO a stock of drugs, etc, and TO the
store and fixtures In which the medl-
cines were kept at Mt. Angel, Oregon,
to the extent OF $500 and $500 re-
spectlyely; that about September l.
1908, the insured property was Who'll
ly destroyed by fire and defendant
was Immediately notified thereof;
whereupon IT'S general agent, John C.
Fox, came to adjust the loss and
plaintiff furnished him a written
statement of the property consumed
as nearly as he could from memory
all his books and papers having been
destroyed, and such agent promised
10 make out, from the memoranda
submitted, formal proof Of loss and
return the same to plaintiff for sig
nature and yerlhcatlon; that Fox
failed to keep such promise but plain
tin relying thereon did not make out
or sign any other memorandum oi
loss until March, 1909, when he de-
llyered to defendant a detailed writ
ten and verified statement thereof
which was returned to him, where
upon he prepared and submitted
amended proof; that plaintiff had
kept and performed all the condi-
tlons OF the policy required Of him
except the making Of the proof OF
loss Within 60 days after the fire
and his delay in this respect was
caused by the conduct and promises
suranCe was ever placed on any OF
the property, the value OF which al
the time OF the fire exceeded $1,000
for which sum judgment was de-
manded. The answer admitted that
the defendant is n corporation; that
II executed the policy mentioned
that the Insured property was total
ly destroyed August 80, 1908; and
that plalntiff did not sign or submit
any proof OF loss until March 30,
1903, when the memoranda fur
nlshed was returned because OF in
sufilclency and another was sup.
piled April 27, following, which was
equally defective, The other aver.
ments OF the complaint are denied
generally. For separate defenses
certain conditions OF the policy were
set forth and breaches thereof
averred but all the stlpulatlons arc
abandoned except the one relating
to the proof OF loss. The reply hav
Ing denied the allegations of new
matter In the answer the cause wal
tried resulting In a judgment fol
plalntif In the sum Of $1,000 and de
fendant appeals.
Moore. ]. II ls maintained that
an error was committed In permit.
ting the defendants agent who so.
liclted the insurance to testify, over
objection and exception, respecting
the value OF stock Of drugs, medi.
clues, etc, when II appeared that he
had no special knowledge of that
class OF goods, NJ. ]. Van Valken.
berg as plaintiffs witness testified
that before the policy was issued he
as defendants agent, examined the
goods and fixtures involved herein
and estimated their values gt $1,000
and $1,000 respectively. 1t does moi
appear that this agent had any
special knowledge of the value oil
the stock OF goods, and II his estl
mate thereof was limited to the
value at the time OF the Are, II i,