Exchange Bank of Novinger v. Iowa State Ins. Co.

• Decision Date: 10 November 1924
• Docket Number: No. 15097.,15097.
• Citation: Exchange Bank of Novinger v. Iowa State Ins. Co., 265 S.W. 855, 218 Mo. App. 587 (Mo. App. 1924)
• Parties: EXCHANGE BANK OF NOVINGER v. IOWA STATE INS. CO. (MUTUAL) OF KEKUK, IOWA.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

265 S.W. 855

EXCHANGE BANK OF NOVINGER v.IOWA STATE INS. CO. (MUTUAL) OF KEKUK, IOWA.

No. 15097.

Kansas City Court of Appeals. Missouri.

November 10, 1924.

Insurance 421—Insurer hold not liable for damages from explosion in adjacent building, though caused by antecedent fire.

Under fire policy exempting insurer from liability for injury to building from explosion, held insurer was liable for damages to building from explosion within it caused by antecedent fire, but not liable for injuries from concussion of air from explosion in another building, though caused by antecedent fire.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Adair County; James A. Cooley, Judge.

Action by the Exchange Bank of Novinger against the Iowa State Insurance Company(Mutual) of Keokuk, Iowa.Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.Affirmed.

S. H. Ellison, John M. Campbell, and M. D. Campbell, all of Kirksville, for appellant.Higbee & Mills, of Kirksville, for respondent.

BLAND, J.

This is a suit upon a fire insurance policy insuring plaintiff's building in Novinger, Adair county, Mo., against "all direct loss or damage by fire except as hereinafter provided."The policy contains the further stipulation that:

"`This company shall not be liable for loss caused directly or indirectly by invasion, insurrection or (unless fire ensues, and in that event for the damage by fire only) by explosion of any kind,' and that this policy shall be void, if dynamite or other explosive is used, kept, or stored on the premises."

On July 3, 1922, an explosion occurred in what was called the Sullivan Building, wherein was a drug store.This building was 80 feet from plaintiff's building, and there intervened between the two buildings a one-story, frame, ironclad building and two vacant lots, the ironclad building being adjacent to the Sullivan Building.A fire preceded the explosion in the Sullivan Building, and as a result of the explosion timbers were blown from the Sullivan Building upon the roof of plaintiff's building, as well as upon the roofs of other buildings.

There was a slight damage, amounting to $10 done to the roof of plaintiff's building by fire communicated from timbers falling thereon.There is no dispute that defendant is liable for its pro rata part of the $10 damage.The principal damage to plaintiff's building was done by concussion caused by the explosion, this damage exceeding the sum of $2,000.

There was a trial before the court, resulting in a judgment against plaintiff for the damage done to its building as the result of the concussion caused by the explosion in the Sullivan Building, and plaintiff has appealed.

It is insisted that the court erred in giving its declaration of law, to the effect that plaintiff was not entitled to recover for the damage caused by the concussion from the explosion.The authorities in this state and in some other states hold that where fire occurs in the property insured, and an explosion takes place therein during the progress of the fire, the effects of which are covered by the policy, and such explosion is a mereincident of the preceding fire, the fire is treated as the efficient cause and the whole loss is within the risk of the insurer, although the policy in terms excludes liability for loss by explosion.La Force v. Insurance Co., 43 Mo. App. 518;Cohn & Greenman v. Ins. Co., 96 Mo. App. 315, 70 S. W. 259;Hallander v. Insurance Co.(Mo. App.)218 S. W. 418;Wheeler v. Insurance Co., 203 N. Y. 283, 96 N. E. 452, 38 L. R. A. (N. S.) 474, Ann. Cas. 1913A, 1297.However, so far as we have been able to discover, it has been universally held that such a policy does...