Majority
p. 743CORTIS et al. v. VAN DERVEER. (Supreme Court, Appellate Term. January 17, 1905.) Argued before SCOTT, MacLEAN, and DAVIS, JJ.
Headnote
1. Insurance Brokers—Premiums—Actions—Persons Entitled to Sue.Where insurance brokers acted as agents for foreign insurance companies in placing the insurance in question, and had no interest in the premiums payable to the insurers, they were not entitled to maintain an action in their own name therefor.
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Twelfth District.
Action by Arthur E. Cortis and another against William Van Derveer. From a Municipal Court judgment in favor of defendant, plaintiffs appeal.
Affirmed.
Wheeler, Cortis & Haight, for appellants.
Ernest Hall, for respondent.
Even if we assume, without deciding, that defendant became personally bound to pay the premiums, and that the contract of insurance was valid and enforceable, 'no right of action: is shown in plaintiffs. They were merely brokers acting as agents for some foreign insurance companies. The premiums constituted
p. 744
the consideration for the contract of insurance. That contract'was between the foreign insurance companies and the railway company, and the premiums became due, not to the brokers, but to the companies who became the insurers. Whatever claim there is consists of the 'claim of these insurers against the insured (and perhaps also against defendant) for the premiums. The plaintiffs were not the insurers, and had no claim as such to the premiums. The case entirely fails' to show that they have acquired any right from the insurers to collect them.
Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur.