Case Name: Max Gross, Respondent, v. Globe & Rutgers Fire Insurance Company, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1932-03-03
Citations: 142 Misc. 918
Docket Number: 
Parties: Max Gross, Respondent, v. Globe & Rutgers Fire Insurance Company, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 142
Pages: 918–918

Head Matter:
Max Gross, Respondent, v. Globe & Rutgers Fire Insurance Company, Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
March 3, 1932.
Davis, Auerbach & Cornell [William J. Carr and Martin A. Schenck of counsel], for the appellant.
Nathan Gross, for the respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The ring involved herein was a ladies' ring which the assured, a male person, had bought some time previously for presentation as an engagement ring. It was being carried at the time of its loss because the assured intended to sell it — the engagement having been broken. Under such circumstances it was not " a personal effect usually carried by a tourist or a traveller," nor was it " personal jewelry belonging to and used or worn by the assured or a member of his family." In any event it comes within the exception in the policy excluding " merchandise for sale."
Judgment reversed, with thirty dollars costs, and complaint dismissed.
Callahan and Untermyer, JJ., concur on the merits, with costs; Levy, J., dissents.