Stansbury v. Smith

Decision Date23 February 1968
Citation424 S.W.2d 571
PartiesK. E. STANSBURY et al., Appellants, v. A. E. SMITH and State Farm Fire and Casualty Insurance Company, Appellees.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky

Lohren F. Martin, Sutton & Martin, Corbin, for appellants.

Robert L. Milby, Hamm, Taylor & Milby, London, for appellees.

JOHN A. BRESLIN, Special Commissioner.

About the first week of May 1961, appellants K. E. Stansbury and Mildred Stansbury, purchased a building and its contents known as the Raleigh Motel. Previously a policy of insurance covering, among other things, the hazard of fire had been issued to the prior owners of the motel by State Farm Fire and Casualty Insurance Company for the period of 24 August 1959 to and including 24 August 1964. On 10 August 1962, this policy of insurance was transferred and assigned to the Stansburys.

Raleigh Motel was a combination motel-dwelling, consisting of eight rental units, in addition to the dwelling unit of the operators.

For a period of time, the motel was operated by the Stansburys but about the 7th of September 1962 it was closed, due chiefly to the fact that lack of business had made it an unprofitable venture. Mrs. Stansbury went back to her old home in Illinois, some three months previous to the closing, and a few days before the closing, Mr. Stansbury also went to Illinois. Before departure, Mr. Stansbury left specific directions to a Mrs. Brown concerning the closing of the Motel. He told her to turn off and drain the water lines, turn off the utilities, and lock it up securely. After his departure, this was done, in September 1962 and no one continued to reside in the unit. No notice was given to appellees, or any of its representatives, of this closing or vacancy. On 1 December 1962, the Raleigh Motel, with its total contents, was consumed by fire. At the time of this fire, and total destruction, the Motel had been vacant for in excess of 80 days. (21 days in September, plus all of October and November)

The Stansburys had executed a note, secured by mortgage, to the appellee A. E. Smith. After the fire, and upon the Stansburys' refusal to satisfy the note, same was paid by State Farm Fire and Casualty Insurance Company under a loan receipt executed by Smith. By virtue of the provisions of the policy of insurance involved and according to the loan receipt, this action was brought in the name of Smith to recover from the Stansburys the face amount of the note with the interest due.

In time the issues were made up, following which the Stansburys moved and were granted permission to file a third party complaint whereby State Farm was made a third party defendant....

To continue reading

Request your trial
19 cases
  • Stanley v. Fire Ins. Exchange
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • October 17, 1990
    ...Travelers Indem. Co. of Illinois (1979) 75 Ill.App.3d 298, 30 Ill.Dec. 876, 884-885, 393 N.E.2d 1223, 1231-1232; 7 Stansbury v. Smith (Ct.App.Ky.1968) 424 S.W.2d 571, 572.) Other courts have interpreted the provision as allowing the period of limitations to run from the date of the casualty......
  • Milby v. Mears
    • United States
    • Kentucky Court of Appeals
    • January 26, 1979
    ...708 (1975). Consequently, the trial court's determination of those issues not briefed upon appeal is ordinarily affirmed. Stansbury v. Smith, Ky., 424 S.W.2d 571 (1968); Hall v. Kolb, Ky., 374 S.W.2d 854 (1964); Herrick v. Wills, Ky., 333 S.W.2d 275 (1960); Craft v. Hall, Ky., 275 S.W.2d 41......
  • Gremillion v. Travelers Indem. Co.
    • United States
    • Louisiana Supreme Court
    • November 9, 1970
    ...months next after inception of the loss,' is valid. Guccione v. New Jersey Ins. Co. of Newark, N.J., La.App., 167 So. 845;2 Stansbury v. Smith, Ky., 424 S.W.2d 571. 'Inception' is defined in Webster's New World Dictionary, College Edition, as 'a beginning or being begun; start; commencement......
  • Clark v. Truck Ins. Exchange
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court
    • August 16, 1979
    ...443 F.2d 844 (9th Cir. 1971) (applying Oregon law); and Ramsey v. Home Ins. Co., 203 Va. 502, 125 S.E.2d 201 (1962). Cf. Stansbury v. Smith, 424 S.W.2d 571 (Ky.1968). Since Nevada does not have a statute which controls this issue, we are not bound by the rules of statutory construction. Com......
  • 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