Court Opinion

ID: 9829817
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 19:39:06.244106+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:06.913315
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
We were in error in supposing that the books required to be kept under section 3 of the policy herein sued on were required to be kept locked in the fireproof safe at night, and at all times when the building mentioned in the policy was not actually open for business. The contradictory testimony of appellee referred to in our opinion related to the books mentioned in section 3 of said policy. Section 2, which is a warranty clause of the policy sued on, required the appellee to “prepare in the regular course of business from and after the date of this policy a set of books, which shall clearly and plainly present a complete record of business transacted, including all purchases, sales, and shipments, both for cash and on credit, or this entire policy shall be null 'and void. The term ‘complete record of business transacted,’ as used above, is meant to include in said set of books a complete record of all property which shall go into the premises and be added to the stock, and of all proxierty taken from the stock, whether by the assured or by^ others, even though not technically purchases or technically sales.” The testimony as to the goods taken from the stock and placed in cold storage, and consequently as to the value of the stock destroyed by fire, is so unsatisfactory that we think this case ought to be sent back for a new trial. . The facts as to this matter are capable of being made reasonably certain.
The motion for rehearing herein is granted, and the judgment heretofore rendered for appellant is set aside, and this case is reversed and remanded.
Reversed and remanded.