Double Insurance

Is where divers insurance are made upon the same inter- ■est in the same subject against the same risks in favor of the same assured, in proportions exceeding the value. 1 Phil. Ins. §§ 359, 366.

Wh. re.livers insurances are made upon I the same subje t the same risks it favor of the same assured, in proportions exceeding the value. 1 I'hill. ins. §§ 350, I E, sub-title, Double In-sur- A like excess in one policy is over-insurance. If the valuation of the whole interest in one policy Is double that in another, and half of the value is insured in each policy according to the valuation In that policy, it is not a double insurance; its being so or not depends on the aggregate of the proportions, one-quarter, one-half, etc., insured by each policy, not upon the aggregate of the amounts. Where the insurance is on the interests of different persons, though on the same goods, it is not double insurance; Wells v. Ins. Co., 0 S. & R. (Pa.) 107: nor la it where canier and shipper each insure; Royster v. Roanoke X. & B. S. B. Co., 26 i ■ I. 192. In case of double insurance, the assured may sue upon all the policies and is entitled to judgment upon all, but he is entitled to but one therefore, if during the pendency of suits on several policies concerning the same risk and interest, the loss is paid in full by one company, the.. against the others must fail, and the insurer paying the loss has a remedy against the other In for a proportionate share of the loss. If there be any doubt as to whether the policies cover the same property or interest, evidence is admissible to show the fact; Wip^in v. Ins. Co., 18 Pick. (Ma 29 Am. Dec. 57ti;./Etna Fire Ins. Co. v. Tyler, 16 Wend. (X. Y.) 386, 30 Am... Ins. Co., 39 Barb. (N. Y.) 302; Peoria Marine & Fire Ins. Co. v. Lewis, IS 111. 553; Sloat v. Ins. Co., 49 Pa. 14. 88 Am. Dec. 477; Merrick v. Ins. Co., 54 U; May, Ins. § 13. The question of double insurance do. generally arise in life insurance, as there is no fixed value to the life, and the person in each case is to pay a fixed sum without regard to other insurance. But where the Insurable Interest; has an ascertainable value the question may ai here two policies a re taken out in differenl offices, by a creditor, on the life of a debtor, and for the same debt Then only the \ le interest can be recovered and the amount recovered on the first policy is to be deducted from the amount payable on the second; May. Ins. $ II"

(or ASSU-

contracts, is where the insured makes re-insurance in this, that it is* made by the insured, with a view of receiving a double satisfaction in case of loss; whereas a re-insurance is made by a former insurer, his executors or assigns, to protect himself and his estate from a risk to which they were liable by the first insurance. ‘The two policies are considered as making but one insurance. They are good to the extent of the value of the effects put in risk; but the insured shall not be permitted to recover a double satisfaction. He can sue the underwriters on both the policies, but he can only recover the real amount of his loss, to which ali the underwriters on both shall contribute in proportion to their several subscriptions. Marsh. Ins. B. 1, c. 4, s. 4.