Case Name: Royal Insurance Co. Ltd. v. William S. Jack
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1925
Citations: 3 Ohio Law Abs. 362
Docket Number: No. 18568
Parties: Royal Insurance Co. Ltd. v. William S. Jack.
Judges: Matthias, Kinkade and Robinson, JJ., concur. Marshall, CJ., Day and Allen, JJ., dissent.
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 3
Pages: 362–362

Head Matter:
No. 545
No. 18568
Royal Insurance Co. Ltd. v. William S. Jack.
Error to the Court of Appeals of Cuyahoga County.
647. INSURANCE — Automobile—Paying for a car with a forged check, not “theft” within terms of policy.

Opinion:
JONES, J.
1. A policy of insurance was issued, indemnifying the owner of an automobile against loss by "theft, robbery and pilferage." In construing the term "theft," it should be given the usual meaning and understanding employed by persons in the ordinary walks of life.
2. Where an owner of an automobile executes a contract of sale for the car, helps the vendee change the license numbers, and in pursuance of his contract of sale, transfers possession and title to vendee, who pays therefor with a forged check, such fraudulent transaction so perpetrated by the vendee does not constitute a "theft" within the terms of the policy.
Judgment reversed.
Matthias, Kinkade and Robinson, JJ., concur. Marshall, CJ., Day and Allen, JJ., dissent.