What are 10 causes of FIRE in a house?

What is the Procedural history of St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co. v. Toman?

• I am trying to get into insurance sales and I was asked this question by a potential employer after I read a short briefing on the case. I don't think I don't think I got it right. Just wondering if I might of said the right thing or not. Here is the case for quick reference: Supreme Court of South Dakota. ST. PAUL FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. James T. TOMAN, Defendant and Appellee, and Van Collins, Defendant. No. 14301. Argued March 20, 1984. Decided July 3, 1984. Following filing of claim by insured for fire loss under a valued policy, insurer filed declaratory judgment action, asserting that insured had no insurable interest in house at time of fire. The Circuit Court, Sixth Judicial Circuit, Tripp County, Marvin S. Talbott, J., entered judgment in favor of insured, and insurer appealed. The Supreme Court, Hertz, Circuit Judge, held that: (1) though auctioneer was insured seller's agent in auction of house which was to be removed from his farmstead, this did not establish authorization to execute instrument of conveyance on behalf of insured; (2) sale of the house was not a sale of an interest in land, and thus provisions of the Uniform Vendor and Purchaser Risk Act did not apply; (3) insured seller retained an insurable interest in the house after auction sale but before it was removed; and (4) insured was entitled to prejudgment interest only from the date of refusal of claim and not from date of fire. Affirmed, with modification as to prejudgment interest. West Headnotes [1] Auctions and Auctioneers 6 47k6 Most Cited Cases Auctioneer and clerk were agents of seller for purposes of selling his property at public auction sale. [2] Auctions and Auctioneers 6 47k6 Most Cited Cases Fact that auctioneer was seller's agent in selling at public auction a house which was to be removed from seller's farmstead did not establish that auctioneer was authorized to execute an instrument of conveyance on behalf of seller. SDCL 43-25-1, 59-8-1. [3] Insurance 1790(5) 217k1790(5) Most Cited Cases (Formerly 217k115(6)) Provisions of the Uniform Vendor and Purchaser Risk Act were not applicable to determine whether seller of house which was to be removed from his farmstead had an insurable interest therein after auction sale and before removal, since sale of the house was not the sale of an interest in land. SDCL 43-26-7. [4] Property 4 315k4 Most Cited Cases Sale at public auction of house which was to be removed from seller's homestead was not the sale of an interest in land. SDCL 57A-2-107(2). [5] Insurance 1790(5) 217k1790(5) Most Cited Cases (Formerly 217k115(6)) Seller of house which was to be removed from his farmstead had insurable interest therein, after auction sale but before the house had been removed, where buyer knew that seller was occupying the house at least on a part-time basis and that removal of house would have to be negotiated with seller. SDCL 57A-2-104(1), 57A-2-107(2), 57A-2-501(2), 57A-2-509(3), 58- 10-8. [6] Interest 39(2.35) 219k39(2.35) Most Cited Cases (Formerly 219k39(2)) Insured was entitled to prejudgment interest on claim for fire loss under a valued policy only from the date of refusal of the claim, and not from date of fire, absent showing that insurer was dilatory in conducting an investigation of claim, and absent other evidence upon refusal of claim, date of refusal would be fixed on date that summons and complaint in insurer's declaratory action was served on insured. *147 Michael L. Luce of Davenport, Evans, Hurwitz & Smith, Sioux Falls, for plaintiff and appellant; Carleton R. Hoy of Davenport, Evans, Hurwitz & Smith, Sioux Falls, on brief. Mark F. Marshall of Bangs, McCullen, Butler, Foye & Simmons, Rapid City, for defendant and appellee; Joseph M. Butler of Bangs, McCullen, Butler, Foye & Simmons, Rapid City, and Michael Strain, White River, on brief. HERTZ, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff-appellant St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co., (Insurer) appeals from a declaratory judgment in favor of the defendant-appellee, James T. Toman (Toman). The judgment awarded Toman $28,000.00 under a valued policy issued by the insurer, together with prejudgment interest computed from September 26, 1981, the date of the fire. Insurer claims the trial court erred in the awarded judgment, and in the prejudgment interest calculation. We affirm, and modify the prejudgment interest award. In a newspaper display advertisement Toman advertised his public auction for September 23, 1981. Among the items listed for sale was a 24 foot by 40 foot house which was to be removed from Toman's farmstead. Prior to the auction sale, the auctioneer announced that the house had to be removed under terms negotiated by the buyer and Toman. Van Collins was the successful bidder at the sale. He purchased the residence for $3,250.00, and issued his check to the auctioneer f

• Answer:

  It's not right answer/wrong answer. The test is actually to see if you can read legal-ese, and translate it into regular English. So. there was a claim it was denied the insured sued the insured won the insurance company appealed the appeals court upheld the original decision.