Home under renovation deemed "owned and occupied"
Plaintiffs purchased a home which they felt was not habitable. They were in the process of renovating the home when it was destroyed in an explosion and fire. At the time of the fire, the plaintiffs had not yet spent the night in the home, though the court noted that they were on the property “almost daily”. The issue in the case was whether the home was an “occupied dwelling”, per Wis. Stat. sec. 632.05(2), which requires an insurer to pay the policy limits to an insured whose owned and occupied dwelling is totally destroyed.
The Court of Appeals held that the home was a “dwelling”, despite the fact that it was being renovated. The court also held that the home was “occupied”, noting that the plaintiffs were on site almost daily and planned to live in the home when the renovations were finished. The court noted that the case was no different than if the plaintiffs had gone on an extended vacation.
Johnson is instructive if you have a fire case where the insured is not living in the residence at all times. If you have such a case, a close comparison of the facts with Johnson is important to distinguish the ruling.
Johnson v. Mt. Morris Mutual Ins. Co. (2010AP2468) [Recommended for Publication] Court of Appeals opinion
