1778-01-26 (static/transcriptions/1778/01/028.jpg)

1778. 1 Term. [Monday] Jan: 26.

effect of an Insurance, and yet Respondentia Interest is certainly Insurable.

Mr. Newman; For the Defendant Mr. Guinand, the under-writer.
Mr. Guinand’s own reason why he would not have under-written the Policy of Insurance on which the Present Action is brought is this “That a Re-assurance has no right to demand a proof of Interest but must be paid as soon as the original Insurance is paid, and in Re-Assurance it is necessary to state it in the Policy of Insurance so to be” Impey call’d on Mr. N. to cite any authorities in support of these reasons, but he said he had none.

Mr. Brix, argued on the same side as Mr. Newman, for the Defendant.

After a good deal of discourse between the Court, the Council, and the Parties, it was settled, the Defendant’s Council should be heard to argue this again, next Term, and the Plaintiff’s also, if he pleases.
We three now seem’d inclined to think that Judgment should be for the Plaintiff, although at the Trial both Impey and Chambers seem’d inclined to think Judgment should be given for the Defendant,
/ on