Playback speed
×
Share post
Share post at current time
0:00
/
0:00
Transcript

A Dog is Nothing More than a Dog

A Dog That Lives at a House is not a Part of the Property

Share

Leave a comment

Get a group subscription


Post 4859

Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gQvs8U8P, see the full video at https://lnkd.in/gn5RCZ7F and at https://lnkd.in/ge3Ekfe5, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4850 posts.

Lana Sloan appealed from summary judgment entered in favor of Farm Bureau Town and Country Insurance Company of Missouri (“Farm Bureau”) while she sought medical payments for injuries she received from a less than obedient and loving dog.

In Lana Sloan v. Farm Bureau Town And Country Insurance Company Of Missouri, and Jesse Clark, Joseph Webb, and Bobbette Webb, No. SD37751, Court of Appeals of Missouri, Southern District, In Division (August 15, 2024) summary judgment established a dog was not a part of the premises.

BACKGROUND

Joseph Webb owns residential property insured by Farm Bureau. Webb leased the insured premises to Jesse Clark, who owns a dog. Webb neither owns nor cares for the dog. Clark’s dog bit Sloan while she was walking on a public roadway not on the insured premises.

The Farm Bureau policy provides coverage for medical payments to non-insureds when such person sustains bodily injury on an insured premises with the permission of any insured, or elsewhere, if the bodily injury: Arises out of a condition on the insured premises.

The only dispute was whether Sloan’s injuries arose out of a condition on the insured premises. The circuit court found the dog was not a condition on the insured premises.

APPLICABLE LAW

The statutes allow penalties to be assessed against an insurer when it refuses to make payment, upon demand and in accordance with the policy, vexatiously, willfully, and without reasonable cause. Where an insurer had no duty to pay under the insurance policy, there cannot be a claim for vexatious refusal to pay.

DISCUSSION

It is apparent that “premises” contemplates the land. A dog, whether permanently kenneled or tethered on the property, is not a part of the premises.

There is a serious distinction between real property and domestic animals kept on that property. The Court of Appeals concluded that Sloan’s injuries did not arise out of a condition on the insured premises.

ZALMA OPINION

A dog is a living breathing animal. It can live at a piece of real property, just like an owner or tenant may live at the premises but neither the owner, tenant, nor pets are part of the property. Sloan needed to prove that her injuries arose out of a condition of the insured premises but could not and the judgment, therefore, in favor of the insurer was affirmed.

(c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.

Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos. Subscribe to my substack at https://lnkd.in/gmmzUVBy or subscribe to my substack at https://lnkd.in/gmmzUVBy, Go to X @bzalma; Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk

Excellence in Claims Handling
Zalma on Insurance
Blog posts digesting new appellate decisions and free videos about insurance claims and insurance law.