Court Opinion

ID: 9704032
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 00:19:21.772955+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:21:54.885592
License: Public Domain

Clinton, J.,
concurring.
I concur in the opinion of White, C. J. In so doing I call attention to the provisions of sections 44-601, 44-602, and 44-603, R. R. S. 1943, which make it unlawful for any insurance company or agent to issue, or any person having an interest in property to procure a fire insurance policy in excess respectively of the fair value of the property, or the value of the insured’s interest in the property. While these statutes refer only to the hazard of fire and may be intended primarily to discourage arson they .are, since the other hazards to be insured against are normally included in the same policy and therefore the same stated value must apply to all hazards, indicative of a general legislative intent to limit indemnity to actual cash value. In this light section 44-380, R. R. S. 1943, is an anomaly.
As a practical matter under the opinion in this case no unfairness can result if both insurer and insured make an appropriate and mutual determination of the actual cash value to be stated in the policy.