Court Opinion

ID: 6235716
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-02-17 20:32:02.774962+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:58:02.644121
License: Public Domain

The judgment of the Supreme Court was entered,
Per Curiam.
— The note signed by the assured for the abated premium, when the policy was delivered, is a written admission that the recital of payment in the policy was not true, and therefore could not give effect to the policy, as an actual payment would. It is not only such a written declaration of non-payment, but it is a contract of even date, qualifying the terms of the policy, and an agreement that the policy shall be without effect and surrendered, in case the note for the premium be not paid. It therefore superseded the policy to the extent of the agreement. It would be a harsh measure of justice to hold the company to the terms of the policy, upon a concession made to the assured for his benefit, and evidenced by his own writing of even date with the delivery, and intended by him to govern his rights. Clearly the company caannot be held to the letter of a policy not paid for, and so altered for the benefit of the assured.
Judgment affirmed.