Standard Fire Ins. Co. v. Griggs, 8898

Decision Date22 May 1978
Docket NumberNo. 8898,8898
Citation567 S.W.2d 60
PartiesThe STANDARD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Thelma Clark GRIGGS, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Appeals

Jones, Trout, Flygare & Moody, James L. Wharton, Lubbock, for appellant.

McCleskey, Harriger, Brazill & Graf, Don Graf, Lubbock, for appellee.

REYNOLDS, Justice.

The trial court, ruling that the word "jewelry" as used in an exclusionary clause of an insurance policy was ambiguous when applied to the Indian belts and bolo ties in controversy and should be construed against the insurer, directed a verdict for the insured on the issue of liability and rendered judgment for the values of the items found by the jury. In its context, the word "jewelry" is not ambiguous and the court should have submitted the requested special issues for the jury to factually determine whether each item was jewelry. Reversed and remanded.

The Standard Fire Insurance Company issued its Texas Standard Homeowners Policy to Thelma Clark Griggs. In one of the policy's insuring provisions is this language:

COVERAGE B UNSCHEDULED PERSONAL PROPERTY owned, worn or used by the Insured . . .

EXCLUSIONS Coverage B does not cover:

e. Loss in excess of $500 (any one loss) of gems, watches, jewelry or furs. . . .

The policy does not contain a definition of jewelry.

While the insurance policy was in force, Mrs. Griggs' home was burglarized. Among the property taken and never recovered were items admitted to be jewelry exceeding the value of $500 and seven Indian belts and four bolo ties.

One of the belts was an old Indiana beaded belt with the beadwork attached to wool yarn. The other six were Navajo belts, made of leather with conchas. One of the six had copper conchas, and the other five had silver conchas which, on the two of the belts, were set with turquoise and separated by "butterflies" made of silver.

The bolo ties were of braided leather. One had a large turquoise stone set in a silver notched bezel and silver tips on the leather. Another was a shadow box bolo tie with a single turquoise stone set in an oval bezel and silver cone tips on the leather. One tie had two turquoise stones and one coral stone in an irregular shaped bezel with leaf forms overlapping, and a squash blossom on silver cone tips. The other was an old Zuni mosaic of a ceremonial "Rainbow man" inlaid with turquoise, jet, coral and mother of pearl with carved silver tips.

The Standard Fire Insurance Company paid Mrs. Griggs $500, but refused any payment for the loss of the belts and ties on the contention that they were jewelry for which any coverage in excess of the $500 payment made was excluded by the policy. This lawsuit resulted.

The evidence revealed that Mrs. Griggs has been interested for thirty years in, and is an active collector of, Indian artifacts and crafts. She had acquired the belts and ties during her travels, some of which were taken as a member of the Acquisition Committee of the West Texas Museum in Lubbock, Texas, charged with locating and acquiring Indian artifacts of museum quality. She expressed the opinion that the concha belts and bolo ties were not considered to be jewelry, but were worn as articles of clothing, the concha belts being worn to assist in holding up pants or cinching in blouses. Introduced in evidence were checks showing some of her personal purchases and carrying the notation "Indian Jewelry" to which had been added in some instances, after the paid checks were returned to her, the words "Bolo ties," "and concho belt," "& belt," and "& concho belt."

Paul Summers, who has been interested in Indian items for almost sixty years and has collected and traded Indian artifacts since the early 1920's testified that he considered concha belts as clothing, and that neither he nor Indians nor other traders referred to them as jewelry. He stated that a bolo tie is a man's item for wear, and he saw no reason to designate the bolo ties as Indian jewelry.

Carla Lee Tanner, Professor Emeritus in the Anthropology Department at the University of Arizona and author of published articles and books about Indians and Indian art, related the history, use and nature of various Indian artifacts, including concha belts and bolo ties. She testified that concha belts and bolo ties were worn for adornment; that the belts were never used as support for pants, skirts or blouses, and that bolo ties are not worn to hold the collar in position. She expressed the opinion...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Continental Cas. Co. v. Allen
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Texas
    • April 3, 1989
    ...of the endorsement, support a finding that FDIC is not an "insured" under such endorsement. Standard Fire Ins. Co. v. Griggs, 567 S.W.2d 60, 63 (Tex.Civ.App. — Amarillo 1978, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (uncertainty of the meaning of a word creates ambiguity). This Court therefore construes Endorsem......
  • Warrilow v. Norrell
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • November 16, 1989
    ...generally accepted meaning, but they are at opposite poles as to what that meaning is. Cf. Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Griggs, 567 S.W.2d 60 (Tex.Civ.App.--Amarillo 1978, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (where the parties agreed on the meaning of the word "jewelry," and the uncertainty was created by......
  • Entzminger v. Provident Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 01-82-0446-CV
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • May 5, 1983
    ...intended. Universal C.I.T. Credit Corp. v. Daniel, 150 Tex. 513, 243 S.W.2d 154, 157 (1951); Standard Fire Insurance v. Griggs, 567 S.W.2d 60, 63 (Tex.Civ.App.--Amarillo 1978, writ ref'd n.r.e.). More specifically, ambiguity in the terms of an insurance contract occurs when there are two or......
  • Kelly Associates, Ltd. v. Aetna Cas. and Sur. Co.
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • July 11, 1984
    ...The interpretation of the takeover clause is a question of law for the court. See, e.g., Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Griggs, 567 S.W.2d 60 (Tex.Civ.App.--Amarillo 1978, writ ref'd n.r.e.); Maryland Casualty Co. v. Golden Jersey Creamery, 389 S.W.2d 701 (Tex.Civ.App.--Corpus Christi 1965,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT