New Amsterdam Cas. Co. v. Iowa State Bank

• Decision Date: 12 December 1921
• Docket Number: 5667.
• Citation: 277 F. 713
• Parties: NEW AMSTERDAM CASUALTY CO. v. IOWA STATE BANK.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

277 F. 713

NEW AMSTERDAM CASUALTY CO. v. IOWA STATE BANK.

No. 5667.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

December 12, 1921

Stone Circuit Judge, dissenting.

Oscar Strauss, of Des Moines, Iowa (Brockett, Strauss & Blake, of Des Moines, Iowa, on the brief), for plaintiff in error.

Charles Hutchinson, of Des Moines, Iowa (Clark, Byers & Hutchinson of Des Moines, Iowa, on the brief), for defendant in error.

Before CARLAND and STONE, Circuit Judges, and MUNGER, District Judge.

MUNGER District Judge.

Whether or not the facts admitted or shown in this case justified a directed verdict in favor of the plaintiff bank is the question presented. By means of a robbery, the bank lost a large amount of money and securities taken from the unlocked safe kept within an unlocked vault. This action was brought upon an insurance policy which had been issued to the bank by the plaintiff in error. The insurer agreed to indemnify the bank:

'A. For all loss of money and securities in consequence of the felonious abstraction of the same during the day or night from the safe or safes (or from the vault, if contents of same are specifically insured) after said safe or safes or vaults have been duly closed and locked, described in said schedule, while located in said banking room, also described in said schedule, hereinafter called the premises, by any person or persons after forcible entry into such safe or safes or vault, or by any accomplice of such person or persons. In the event that the said safe or safes or vault are not locked by time lock, the company shall not be liable for loss of said money and securities feloniously abstracted therefrom unless said forcible entry is made therein by the use of tools, explosives, chemicals, or electricity directly thereupon.

'B. For all loss by damage to said money and securities and to said safe or safes or vault described in said schedule, or to the premises, or to the office furniture and fixtures therein, caused by such person or persons while making or attempting to make such entry into said premises, vault, safe, or safes.

'C. For all loss by robbery (commonly known as 'holdup') of money and securities: (1) From within the banking inclosure reserved for the use of the officers or office employes of the assured, while at least one officer or office employe of the assured is present and regularly at work in the premises: (2) From an officer or office employe of the assured while transferring the same during the assured's regular office hours, either way between the said banking inclosures and any safe or vault described in the schedule as located in the premises, outside of the said inclosures: (3) from within that part of the safe or safes or vault insured hereunder, caused by robbers during the day or night, by compelling under the threat of personal violence an officer or employe of the assured to unlock and open the safe or safes or vault.'

The bank occupied a rectangular room fronting on Locust street in Des Moines, Iowa. A door opened into it from the street, and led into the portion of the room known as the lobby, or the portion of it commonly used by the public in transacting business with the officers and employes. The lobby was a little longer than half the length of the banking room. Opposite this lobby was: First, an office room containing several desks usually occupied by the chief officers of the bank, and separated from the lobby by a gate and a counter; and, second, three latticed wire enclosures, commonly called cages, in which the tellers and others worked. These cages faced the lobby and had the usual wicket gates in front, and they opened in the rear into a narrow passageway leading from the office in front, and passing in the rear of the cages to the rear portion of the banking room. In this rear portion was a counter and partition adjoining the last cage and which separated the lobby from the room. There was also a vault in which there was a safe and a money chest. Near the vault a small room was partitioned off and used as a lavatory. The vault had a door upon which there was a combination and a time lock, and the chest door had a combination lock. The robbers were admitted to the lobby on the statement that they wished to deposit some money. It was a little before the regular time for opening the bank, but the assistant cashier and two other employes were already at work. The time lock on the safe had yielded and the cashier had worked the combination lock and opened the safe and had also opened the chest and had taken to the cages a portion of the money and securities to be kept there for ready use. The robbers suddenly confronted the employes with drawn revolvers and forced them to march behind the cages into the rear room and vault and then into the lavatory, where they were locked in. The robbers took a large amount of money from the safe, some from the chest, and some from the trays in the cages, and escaped by way of the door into the street. Upon these facts, is the loss covered by the policy of insurance? No particular question is made as to the money taken from the cages, but the amount so taken is not shown. The question that is argued is the liability for the money taken from the safe or chest within the vault.

The language of clause C(1), which has been quoted, is relied upon by the insured as indemnifying it against this loss, as it interprets the word 'inclosure' in the clause defining a robbery 'from within the banking inclosure reserved for the use of the officers or office employes of the assured' to mean all that part of the banking room except the lobby used by the bank's customers. In this view the vault is considered as a part of the inclosure. The first clause of paragraph C, if it stood alone, might be thus construed, but such a construction makes the following clause of this policy lead to an absurd result. The words 'the premises' in that clause had already been defined in clause A as the banking room described in the schedule, and the schedule defined the location of the building at 603 Locust street in Des Moines, Iowa. ...