United States Eighth Circuit

Plaintiff's property was vacant for purposes of his homeowner's policy, and the district court did not err in applying the policy's vacancy exclusion, as sporadic nighttime visits and daytime remodeling projects do not qualify as habitation.

Appellate Information

• Decided 07/02/2003
• Published 07/02/2003

Judges

• HEANEY, Circuit Judge., Before RILEY, and HEANEY, Circuit Judges, and ERICKSEN, District Judge.

Court

• United States Eighth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Robert U. Patient, argued, St. Paul, MN, for appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• John Laravuso, argued, Minneapolis, MN (Bradley Ayers and Andrea Kiehl of Minneapolis, MN, on the brief), for appellee.