# Home Mutual Fire Insurance v. Jones

> Court of Appeals of Arkansas · October 28, 1998 · 63 Ark. App. 221

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9684888

## Case

- **Full name:** HOME MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY v. Charles JONES and Lavonne Jones
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Arkansas
- **Decided:** October 28, 1998
- **Citations:** 63 Ark. App. 221; 977 S.W.2d 12; 1998 Ark. App. LEXIS 685
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Griffen
- **Judges:** Pittman, Robbins, Rogers, Stroud, Roaf, Griffen
- **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/9684888

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding the penalty was appropriate despite the insurer’s purported good faith in contesting claim

## Opinion text

Wendell L. Griffen, Judge, dissenting. I would reverse because of the trial court’s decision to instruct the jury regarding ambiguity. I agree with appellant that the instruction was not warranted by the evidence. The policy provision that excluded from coverage loss caused “direcdy or indirectly by (a) frost or cold weather or (b) snow storm, tidal wave, high water or overflow, whether driven by wind or not” is clear, definite, and unconfusing.
Appellees presented proof and argued that their loss resulted from hail, a named peril in their insurance policy. Appellant contended that their loss was caused by ice and snow. Obviously, the policy could not cover loss caused by hail and exclude hail. Unless one reasons that frost, cold weather, snow storm, tidal wave, high water, or overflow can be reasonably confused for hail, it would seem that no ambiguity existed in the policy language to justify the jury instruction.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9684888. Public record. Not legal advice.