She was paid $10,000 for the earnest money and $4,928.99 for landscaping and other improvements made on the home with her funds. Rather, Barham was paid $69,144.89 for contents lost in the fire. USAA did not pay the face value of $242,000 for Barham's homeowner's policy. Finally, Lutey was paid $673.57 for damage to “other structures.” At the time of the fire, Barham had paid Lutey $1,200 in rent for six months. She was also paid $7,200 for the loss of rental income for six months. She was paid the $242,000 face value of the policy. As a result of the loss, USAA paid Lutey $249,873.57. On November 8, 2011, lightning struck the house, and it was destroyed by fire. The annual premium for Barham's renters policy was $86.14. The annual premium on the Lutey fire policy was $583.44.
The annual premium on Barham's homeowner policy was $584.74. Barham paid the initial premiums on all the policies. The $242,000 policy limits on the home were calculated using basic information of the home's characteristics. Lutey and Barham each had separately contacted USAA by phone on different occasions and taken out the policies. Additionally, Lutey obtained a “fire policy” with USAA covering the home to $242,000. Barham also obtained a renter's policy to cover her personal possessions in the house for $75,000. Shortly after moving into the home, on June 29, 2011, Barham took out a homeowner's policy with USAA Casualty Insurance Company (“USAA”) for $242,000 and an additional $181,500 for personal property. Barham also made several improvements to the residence with her own funds. The $1,200 monthly payment was chosen as the typical monthly rent on a house of the same type. Nevertheless, the mother and daughter also considered Barham's payments to Lutey as rent. Barham considered herself as the person purchasing the home. Barham informally agreed to make monthly payments of $1,200 to Lutey to reimburse her for paying to build the house. The residence was purchased in Lutey's name. Lutey agreed to pay for the rest of the construction of the home using cash from her brokerage account. Barham then supplied $10,000 in earnest money on April 28, 2011, to pay for the construction of a home. The divorce contest prevented her from building a home with former community funds during the proceedings, so Barham obtained the help of her mother, Claire Lutey (“Lutey”). At the time, she was going through a contentious divorce. Patricia Barham (“Barham”) was attempting to build and purchase a home in April 2011.
HOME PROTECTOR USAA TRIAL
The trial court granted summary judgment, and we now affirm. The defendant moved for summary judgment asserting that plaintiffs were properly paid benefits in accordance with their separate insurable interests and the terms of the policies. The mother and daughter then brought this suit alleging that defendant had not properly paid both of them under the terms of their respective policies. After the daughter had lived in the new home for only a few months, the home was totally destroyed by fire. Two fire insurance policies were purchased from defendant, one by each woman to protect her interest in the home. The house was built, and title to the home was placed in the name of the mother. In this unique setting, a mother came to the aid of her daughter and helped her build a home during the procedural ordeal of the daughter's divorce. Cook, Yancey, King & Galloway, by: Brian A.
Nelson, Zentner, Sartor & Snellings, L.L.C., by: Thomas G. Decided: June 25, 2014īefore WILLIAMS, CARAWAY and GARRETT, JJ. USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant–Appellee.
0 kommentar(er)
