Thone v. Cairo

• Decision Date: 07 December 1987
• Docket Number: No. 87-012,87-012
• Citation: 130 N.H. 157,536 A.2d 183
• Parties: Pauline F. THONE, et al. v. Ruth CAIRO and Aetna Casualty and Surety Company.
• Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court

Page 183

536 A.2d 183

130 N.H. 157

Pauline F. THONE, et al. v. Ruth CAIRO and Aetna Casualty and Surety Company.

No. 87-012.

Supreme Court of New Hampshire.

Dec. 7, 1987.

Cullity, Kelley & McDowell, Manchester (Joseph F. McDowell, III, and Sean P. Gill, on the brief, and Mr. McDowell orally), for plaintiffs, Pauline F. Thone, Administratrix, and Shirley Souther, Administratrix.

Ouellette, Hallisey, Dibble & Tanguay P.A., Dover (Stephen H. Roberts, on the brief and orally), for defendant Aetna Cas. and Sur. Co.

BATCHELDER, Justice.

This is an appeal by the defendant insurance company from a summary judgment granted to the plaintiffs in a declaratory judgment action finding coverage under a homeowner's policy. We reverse.

Ruth Cairo, the defendant insured in this action, owned real estate abutting the easterly limit of Lafayette Road in Seabrook on August 10, 1982, the date of the accident giving rise to this litigation. The real estate comprising the defendant's holdings consisted of two parcels conveyed to Ruth and John Cairo by separate conveyances from George F. Eld, Jr. The first parcel was conveyed in September 1967, and consisted of a little over a half acre. The second parcel, which abuts the first parcel on two sides, was substantially greater in area, consisting of several acres, and was conveyed in August 1973. The Cairos built their residence on the small parcel they had originally purchased. Mrs. Cairo was an executive officer in a small closely held corporation, Rockingham Fireworks Corporation (Rockingham Fireworks), which had leased the second tract from Mrs. Cairo. On August 10, 1982, there was an explosion of substantial magnitude resulting from an occurrence on the property under lease to Rockingham Fireworks. The force of the explosion caused the deaths of the plaintiffs' decedents as well as death and injuries to other persons. The leased property was enclosed by a fence, and Mrs. Cairo on the date of the accident resided in her home on the adjoining lot.

The plaintiffs, representing the estates of the decedents, filed a lawsuit against Mrs. Cairo alleging negligence, first, as a landowner and, second, as an executive officer of Rockingham Fireworks. Mrs. Cairo's insurer, defendant Aetna Casualty and Surety Company (Aetna), denied coverage under her homeowner's policy on either count. Mrs. Cairo did not challenge Aetna's decision, but the plaintiffs did by filing a petition for declaratory judgment to determine Aetna's obligations under the homeowner's policy. Following motions for summary judgment filed by both parties, the Superior Court (Gray, J.) approved a recommendation of the Master (Charles T. Gallagher, Esq.) that Aetna was not obligated to defend Mrs. Cairo as an executive officer of Rockingham Fireworks, but was obligated to defend Mrs. Cairo as a landowner. Upon granting Aetna's motion for clarification, the master upheld the original decision, and the Superior Court (Nadeau, J.) affirmed.

The focus of this appeal is determining whether the coverage under Mrs. Cairo's homeowner's policy, which was issued by Aetna after the purchase of the residence lot, extends to an adjoining lot purchased at a later date and subsequently leased to a small closely held corporation in which Mrs. Cairo is an executive officer.

"Summary judgment procedure allows a final judgment to be entered when there is no genuine issue of material fact requiring a formal trial." Arsenault v. Willis, 117 N.H. 980, 983, 380 A.2d 264, 266 (1977). In this case, the superior court, approving the master's recommendation, determined that there was no genuine issue as to whether Aetna was obligated to defend Mrs. Cairo as a landowner because "the description of the premises in the policy is unambiguous and sufficiently general to include the premises adjoining the residence which were leased to [Rockingham Fireworks]."

"The final interpretation of an insurance policy is for this court." Laconia Rod & Gun Club v. Hartford Acc. & Indemn. Co., 123 N.H. 179, 182, 459 A.2d 249, 250 (1983). The interpretation of Mrs. Cairo's homeowner's policy turns on the definition of "insured...