Case Name: LOCEY v. AMERICAN CENTRAL INS. CO. LOCEY v. PACIFIC FIRE INS. CO. LOCEY v. HARTFORD FIRE INS. CO
Court: Supreme Court of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1886-09-16
Citations: 2 Cal. Unrep. 708
Docket Number: No. 11,548
Parties: LOCEY v. AMERICAN CENTRAL INS. CO. LOCEY v. PACIFIC FIRE INS. CO. LOCEY v. HARTFORD FIRE INS. CO.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Unreported Cases
Volume: 2
Pages: 708–708

Head Matter:
LOCEY v. AMERICAN CENTRAL INS. CO. LOCEY v. PACIFIC FIRE INS. CO. LOCEY v. HARTFORD FIRE INS. CO.
No. 11,548;
September 16, 1886.
11 Pac. 791.
Fire Insurance—Waiver of Other Insurance.—Evidence held to show a waiver of notice of other insurance, or any act working an estoppel from asserting want of such notice, on defendants’ part.
These were actions brought by the appellant to recover on fire insurance policies issued by the respondents, who set up as a defense that the plaintiff had insured his premises in more than one company without consent.
Freeman, Johnson & Bates for plaintiff and appellant; T. C. Van Ness and Gray & Haven for defendants and respondents.
Cited and followed in Holbrook v. Baloise Fire Ins. Co., 117 Cal 567, 49 Pac. 557, where the court say: “The insured having procured further insurance without the consent of the insurer, the policy sued on became void, in virtue of the express provision for such result.”

Opinion:
By the COURT.
These three cases are embraced within one appeal. The court below was justified in granting the nonsuits. The evidence failed to show a waiver by the defendants of notice of other insurance, and failed to show any act by which the defendants would be estopped from asserting want of such notice. The orders denying motion for new trial are affirmed.