Penman v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co.,
216 U.S. 311 (1910)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Penman v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 216 U.S. 311 (1910)

Penman v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company

No. 67

Argued January 7, 10, 1910

Decided February 21, 1910

216 U.S. 311


The rule of ejusdem generis is a rule of interpretation, and even if it should be applied more liberally to contracts of insurance than to contracts of other kinds, it cannot be so applied as to exclude "blasting powder" from a prohibition to keep or allow on insured premises certain specified explosives and "other explosives."

Where the policy furnishes the only way by which its terms can be

Page 216 U. S. 312

waived and expressly provides against modification by custom of trade or manufacture or by agents, and are unambiguous, courts cannot admit parol testimony to alter the written words of the contract. Northern Assurance Co. v. Grand View Building Association, 183 U. S. 308.

151 F. 961, affirmed.

The facts, which involve the liability of a fire insurance company on a policy of insurance, are stated in the opinion.

Page 216 U. S. 314

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.