Martin L. Rickerson, Appellant v. the Hartford Fire Insurance Company, Respondent, Impleaded With the Washington…

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's judgment, holding that the fire insurance policy's ambiguous description of the premises must be construed in favor of the insured, that the insurer's representative could not testify to the company's intent, and that alleged industry customs were not admissible without proof of the parties' knowledge. Accordingly, a new trial was ordered.