Case Name: FIDELITY-PHENIX FIRE INS. CO. OF NEW YORK v. GLASOW
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1927-05-07
Citations: 18 F.2d 957
Docket Number: No. 3856
Parties: FIDELITY-PHENIX FIRE INS. CO. OF NEW YORK v. GLASOW.
Judges: Before EVANS, PAGE, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 18
Pages: 957–957

Head Matter:
FIDELITY-PHENIX FIRE INS. CO. OF NEW YORK v. GLASOW.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
May 7, 1927.
Rehearing Denied May 28, 1927.
No. 3856.
Robt. J. Folonie, of Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff in error.
L. P. Fox, of Chilton, Wis., for defendant in error.
Before EVANS, PAGE, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Defendant in error brought this action on an insurance poliey to recover a fire loss. The sole defense was an alleged cancellation of the poliey the day before the fire occurred. At the close of the evidence, both parties moved for a directed verdict. The court granted plaintiff's motion, the parties having agreed upon the amount of the loss.
Our inquiry is a simple one. Was the evidence on the issue of cancellation conflicting? For, to justify a reversal of the judgment, the record must conclusively establish a cancellation. In other words, if there is any conflict in the evidence on this issue there must be an affirmance. An examination of the testimony convinces us at once that the evidence on this issue is conflicting. This being the situation, defendant's motion for a directed verdict was properly denied.
The judgment is affirmed.