Discussion:
Issue: Is arson a type of vandalism?
Case: Cipriano v. Patrons Mutual Insurance Company of Connecticut
Facts: Juacikino Cipriano purchased an insurance policy on his house from Patrons Mutual Insurance Company. The policy stated that the company would not pay for any damage to the residence caused by vandalism or burglary if the residence was vacant for more than 30 days in a row just before the loss. Furthermore, the company would not pay for damage to personal property caused by fire, lightening or vandalism.
After Cipriano's house had been vacant for more than 30 days, an arsonist burned it down. Patrons denied his claim on the grounds that arson is vandalism, which his policy did not cover. Cipriano filed suit against Patrons. The insurance company filed a motion for summary judgment.