# Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Armstrong

> Indiana Court of Appeals · January 8, 1979 · 66 Ind. Dec. 583

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9521828

## Case

- **Full name:** TRAVELERS INDEMNITY CO., Defendant-Appellant, v. Orrie L. ARMSTRONG, Plaintiff-Appellee
- **Court:** Indiana Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** January 8, 1979
- **Citations:** 66 Ind. Dec. 583; 384 N.E.2d 607; 1979 Ind. App. LEXIS 1175
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Staton
- **Judges:** Hoffman, Robertson, Staton
- **Cited by:** 20 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9521828

## Opinion text

STATON, Judge,
concurring.
I concur with the majority opinion, however, I feel that the definition of “actual cash value” needs additional clarification. The majority predicates its definitional rationale upon the indemnity aspect of the insurance policy. It assumes that indemnity necessarily includes a functional restoration of the whole. This definition of “actual cash value” ignores the practical result that a restored interior of a house may have to be accomplished with new materials rather than used materials which may increase the market value of the house. Since the policy did not define “actual cash value” and since an ambiguity existed, the ambiguity was construed against the insurer. Furthermore, depreciation of some structural parts of the interior of a house is unrealistic and at best arbitrary. For example, a handrail to a stairway, a stairway, doors, thresholds, windows, floors, walls, etc. Therefore, indemnity must include functional restoration of the whole within policy limits.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9521828. Public record. Not legal advice.