Orient Mutual Insurance Company v. Wright
THIS case was brought up by writ of error from the Circuit Court of the United States for the district of Maryland.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
It was argued by Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Cutting for the plaintiff in error, and by Mr. Brent and Mr. May for the defendant.
The arguments chiefly turned upon the point when under this policy the risk commenced. The counsel for the plaintiff in error contended, that it did not attach until the assured paid such premium as should be in good faith named by the insurer as an adequate compensation for the risk to be assumed. The counsel for the defendant in error contended, that the contract was irrevocable the moment the premium and extension was reported and approved.
1 Parsons Contracts, 406, 407, note K.
Tayloe v. Merchants' Insurance Company, 9 How., 390.
The contract is not the less complete, because an increased premium was left open for subsequent agreement.
This was decided in United States v. Wilkins, 6 Wheat., 135, and not overruled, as supposed, in 17 Ohio, 192.
But here is an express obligation to pay an increased premium, and that is itself as good as if the increased premium had been paid at the time-promise for promise is a good consideration.
1 Parsons Contracts, 373-376.
19 Howard, 323.
Mr. Justice NELSON delivered the opinion of the court
Notes edit
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse