Legal Opinion · Dissent

Van Norman v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided December 3, 1976No. 5673Published

1DissentDomengeaux, Judge

I respectfully dissent.

The pertinent provisions of the homeowner’s policy at issue are set forth as follows:

“DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND INTERESTS COVERED

Coverage C — Unscheduled Personal Property

*434This coverage also includes such unscheduled personal property while elsewhere than on the described premises, anywhere in the world:

1. owned or used by an Insured; . .

PERILS INSURED AGAINST

10. Theft, meaning any act of stealing or attempt thereat, including loss of property from a known place under circumstances when a probability of theft exists. Unscheduled personal property contained in any bank,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Levy v. DuclauxLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1976
  2. Wilks v. Allstate Insurance CompanyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1967
  3. Cotlar v. Gulf Ins. Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1975
  4. Blanchard v. Hanover Insurance CompanyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1971
  5. Smith v. Ranger Insurance CompanyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1974

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API