Powell v. Insurance Co. of North America
| Citation | 285 S.C. 588,330 S.E.2d 550 |
| Decision Date | 27 February 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. 0473,0473 |
| Court | South Carolina Court of Appeals |
| Parties | Roy A. POWELL, Jr., Respondent, v. INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA, Appellant. . Heard |
Edwin P. Martin, of Turner, Padget, Graham & Laney, P.A., Columbia, for appellant.
T. English McCutchen, III, and John R. Holland, of Whaley, McCutchen, Blanton & Rhodes, Columbia, for respondent.
In this action to recover insurance benefits, the Insurance Company of North America (INA) appeals from an order refusing to direct a verdict in its favor and directing a verdict in favor of the respondent Roy A. Powell, Jr., in the amount of $6,410. INA also appeals from an order awarding Powell attorney fees in the amount of $2,115.30. We reverse the former and vacate the latter.
We need only address the issue of whether Powell had an insurable interest in property stolen from his father's home to support a contract of insurance.
In several discussions with her family, the last occurring in December, 1977, Powell's mother indicated she wanted her three sons to have upon her death certain items of silver owned by her. She wanted Powell to have several pieces matching his and his wife's flatware pattern.
Powell's mother died unexpectedly one month later. Her will bequeathed all her property to Powell's father.
In July, 1980, someone broke into Powell's father's home in Columbia and stole a quantity of silver worth between $60,000 and $70,000. The stolen articles included the silver Powell's mother wanted Powell to have. This silver, valued at $6,410, and all the other silver owned by Powell's mother were kept on display in his father's home after his mother's death until they were stolen approximately two and one-half years later.
Powell resided in Charleston at the time of the theft and was insured under a homeowner's policy issued by INA.
After the theft, Powell filed a claim with INA for the loss of several silver pieces taken from his father's home. INA refused to pay the claim. It contended Powell had no insurable interest in the items and that its policy therefore did not cover the loss. This action followed.
In this country, it is a rule of law that one cannot insure for his own benefit the property of another in which he has no interest. Note, Insurance: Insurable Interest in Oklahoma--Time for a Change, 31 OKLA.L.REV. 718 (1978). Insurance law accepts as a settled rule that an insured must possess an interest of some kind in the subject matter of the policy. 44 C.J.S. Insurance Section 175 at 869 (1945). Regarding property insurance contracts in particular, if the insured has no interest in the property, he sustains no loss by the property's destruction. 4 J. & J. Appleman, Insurance Law and Practice, Section 2121 at 26 (1969). In order to recover on a policy of insurance, the insured must prove an insurable interest in the property both at the time the policy is issued and becomes effective and at the time of the loss. 43 Am.Jur.2d Insurance Section 944 at 969 (1982).
As to what constitutes an "insurable interest," our Supreme Court has given the following definition to the term:
"It may be said, generally, that any one has an insurable interest in property who derives a benefit from its existence or would suffer loss from its destruction." 14 R.C.L. 910.
"An insurable interest in property is any right, benefit or advantage arising out of or dependent thereon, or any liability in respect thereof, or any relation to or concern therein of such a nature that it might be so affected by the contemplated peril as to directly damnify the insured." Joyce on Insurance (2d Ed.) Section 887.
Crook v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co., 175 S.C. 42 at 48, 178 S.E. 254 at 257 (1934).
Powell testified that he had an insurable interest in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rutledge v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co.
...(1976). See Nichols v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 279 S.C. 336, 306 S.E.2d 616 (1983); Powell v. Insurance Company of North America, 330 S.E.2d 550 (S.C.Ct.App.1985). As we read Section 38-9-320(1) and as it has been construed by our Supreme Court, either a settlement of a ......
-
Carton v. B&B Equities Grp., LLC
...interest.” Warren v. Pilgrim Health & Life Ins. Co., 217 S.C. 453, 60 S.E.2d 891, 893 (1950); see also Powell v. Ins. Co. of N. America, 285 S.C. 588, 330 S.E.2d 550, 551–52 (1985). Such contracts are “void in its inception and unenforceable on grounds of public policy, being a mere wagerin......
-
Browning v. Browning
...both at the time the policy is issued and becomes effective and at the time of the loss. Powell v. Insurance Co. of N. America, 285 S.C. 588, 589-90, 330 S.E.2d 550, 551-52 (Ct.App.1985) (citations omitted); see Warren v. Pilgrim Health & Life Ins. Co., 217 S.C. 453, 456, 60 S.E.2d 891, 893......
-
Belton v. Cincinnati Ins. Co.
...the loss. South Carolina Ins. Co. v. White, 301 S.C. 133, 138, 390 S.E.2d 471, 475 (Ct.App.1990); Powell v. Ins. Co. of North America, 285 S.C. 588, 590, 330 S.E.2d 550, 552 (Ct.App.1985). When a contract to purchase property terminates, the purchaser's insurable interest is extinguished. W......
-
CHAPTER 2
...loss. South Carolina Ins. Co. v. White, 301 S.C. 133, 138, 390 S.E.2d 471, 475 (S.C. Ct. App. 1990); Powell v. Insurance Co. of N. Am., 285 S.C. 588, 590, (S.C. Ct. App. 1985). When a contract to purchase property terminates, the purchaser’s insurable interest is extinguished. Where an insu......
-
CHAPTER 2 THE CONTRACT OF PERSONAL INDEMNITY
...of the loss. South Carolina Ins. Co. v. White, 301 S.C. 133, 138, 390 S.E.2d 471, 475 (S.C. Ct. App. 1990); Powell v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 285 S.C. 588, 590, 330 S.E.2d 550, 552 (S.C. Ct. App. 1985). When a contract to purchase property terminates, the purchaser's insurable interest is extin......