Atherton v. Brown

Decided May 15, 1817

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1817-05-15

Assumpsit on. a policy of insurance, whereby the defendant insured 200 dollars for the plaintiff, on “ property on board tht Spanish brig New Constitution, from the Havana to her port of discharge in the United, States.” in a case stated for the consideration of the Court, it was agreed that the plaintiff was interested to the amount insured by the policy in property on board the American brig Stranger, of Portland, which was at the Havana when news of the war between the…

Cited in Ballentine's (1916)’s definition of “Ab extra” · Black's (1910)’s definition of “Ab Extra”

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1817-05-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently September 1905

1 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1The question is, whether the words in the policy, viz., the Spanish hrig New Constitution, amount to a warranty that the vessel was Spanish; or whether they may be considered as merely descriptive of the vessel, or as the name of the vessel. We are of opinion that the description of the vessel, as contained in this policy, includes her national character, and that it amounts to a warranty that she was, in fact, a Spanish vessel.

¶2Parol evidence of what was within the knowledge of the under writers was not admissible, (a)

¶3It being agreed that the vessel was not Spanish, but American, the warranty was not complied with; and the defendant is not liable in this action. (4)

¶4Plaintiff nonsuit.

¶5[Ewer vs. The Washington Ins. Co,—Ed.]

¶6Vide ante, p. 106, Higgins vs. Livermore S P