Scully v. Bremer County Farmers' Mut. Fire Ins. Ass'n
Decision Date | 22 November 1932 |
Docket Number | 41379 |
Citation | 245 N.W. 280,215 Iowa 368 |
Parties | W. P. SCULLY, Appellee, v. BREMER COUNTY FARMERS' MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE ASSOCIATION, Appellant |
Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Appeal from Bremer District Court.--M. F. EDWARDS, Judge.
Appeal from judgment permitting recovery on fire insurance policy.
Affirmed.
McCoy & Beecher, for appellee.
Sager & Sweet, for appellant.
Appellant insured a dwelling house, owned by appellee, against loss or damage by fire. The house was equipped with an acetylene gas lighting plant, which became out of order. In the process of adjusting it, a quantity of gas escaped into the basement of the house and was ignited by the flame of a lighted gas jet, with the result that the expanding gases blew a large part of the foundation from under the house and caused other damage. It is doubtful whether any of the material of the house was set on fire. In any event, the damage due to actual burning of such material was of no consequence.
Proper proof of loss was made. The parties have agreed upon the sum in which the house was damaged. Appellant denied liability on the ground that the damage was not occasioned by fire. Trial was had to the court and judgment was entered, for the agreed amount, against appellant, from which it appeals.
The contract of insurance contains no language germane to the the case which excepts liability for damage by explosion.
The appeal presents only one question, namely, was the damage to the house occasioned by fire?
The question has its answer in the holding of this court in Furbush v. Consolidated Patrons' of the Farmers Mutual Insurance Co., 140 Iowa 240, 118 N.W. 371. In that case the pertinent provisions of the contract of insurance were substantially similar to the contract in this case. The thing insured against was damage by fire. Explosions were not excepted. In that case, as in this, loss was occasioned by the ignition of acetylene gas. In that case the gas was ignited by a lamp; in this, by an open lighted gas jet. In that case, as in this, damage due to actual burning was negligible. In that case, as in this, damage was due to the violent expansion of the burning gases, or as the parties put it, to the explosion of the gas. In that case, as in this, the burning gases produced flame. In that case recovery on the contract of insurance was permitted, and in the case at bar, it must be held that the damage complained of was occasioned by fire, and that appellee's recovery is proper, unless our former case is overruled. The court is not disposed to overrule the case.
It is contended that the holding of the court in Furbush v. Insurance Co., 140 Iowa 240, 118 N.W. 371, is not in harmony with Vorse v. Jersey Plate Glass Ins. Co., 119 Iowa 555, 93 N.W. 569; Githens v. Great American Ins. Co. of New York, 201 Iowa 266, 207 N.W. 243, and Sigourney Produce Co. v. Milwaukee Mechanics' Ins. Co., 211 Iowa 1203, 235 N.W. 284.
In Vorse v. Jersey Plate Glass Ins. Co., 119 Iowa 555, 93 N.W. 569, action was brought on a policy insuring certain plate glass in a building owned by plaintiff against loss or damage by breakage through accident. The policy contained this provision:
"This Company is not liable to make good any loss or damage which may happen by or in consequence of any fire."
It appears that the items of damage involved in that case were occasioned by the explosion of fumes of gasoline which were unintentionally ignited by a match or light in some room in the building. It fairly appears that the glass was instantly shattered by the expanding gases, and that as a result of the explosion the building was set on fire. In this situation it was contended that the damage to the glass was occasioned by or in consequence of fire. In discussing the contention of the insurance company the court says:
Proceeding to the determination of this question the court said:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bilsky v. Sun Insurance Office, Limited
... ... County. — Hon. William C. Hughes, Judge ... (1) In an action on a policy of fire insurance, the burden is upon the defendant to ... App. 369; Rossini v. St. Paul F. & M. Ins. Co. (1920) (Cal.), 188 Pac. 564; German American ... 400; Pennsylvania Co. v. Ohio Farmers Ins. Co., 7 Fed. Supp. 701; Hobbs v. Northern ... Ins. Co., 13 Ill. 676; Way v. Abington Mut. F. Ins. Co., 166 Mass. 67, 32 L.R.A. 608, 55 Am ... Rep. 870, 92 S.W. 402, 5 Ann. Cas. 777; Scully v. Bremen County Ins. Co. (Iowa), 245 N.W. 280; ... Stephens v. Fire Assn., 139 Mo. App. 369, 123 S.W. 63; Renshaw v. Ins ... ...
-
Bilsky v. Sun Ins. Office, Ltd., of London, England
... ... from the Circuit Court of Audrain County".--Hon. William C ... Hughes, Judge ... \xC2" ... fire insurance, the burden is upon ... the defendant ... 400; Pennsylvania ... Co. v. Ohio Farmers Ins. Co., 7 F.Supp. 701; Hobbs ... v. Northern ... Co., 13 Ill. 676; Way v. Abington Mut. F. Ins ... Co., 166 Mass. 67, 32 L.R.A. 608, ... 870, 92 S.W. 402, 5 ... Ann. Cas. 777; Scully v. Bremen County Ins. Co ... (Iowa), 245 N.W ... Stephens v. Fire Assn., ... 139 Mo.App. 369, 123 S.W. 63; Renshaw v ... ...
-
Commercial Standard Insurance Company v. Feaster
... ... in the business of issuing policies of fire and extended coverage insurance. Egbert leased ... Consolidated Patrons' & Farmers' Mutual Insurance Co., 140 Iowa 240, 118 N.W ... 243, 44 A.L.R. 863; Scully v. Bremer County Farmers' Mutual Fire Insurance ... ...
- Scully v. Bremer Cnty. Farmers' Mut. Fire Ins. Ass'n