The plaintiffs' home was severely damaged by a fire while undergoing renovations.
The plaintiffs alleged the fire was caused by the spontaneous combustion of stain-soaked rags left by the defendant painting subcontractor, and sought to hold the general contractor vicariously liable.
The court found that the plaintiffs failed to prove the cause of the fire on a balance of probabilities, accepting the painter's evidence that he did not leave rags in the home and noting that electrical arcing could not be ruled out as a cause.
The court declined to draw an adverse inference against the defendants for failing to call another fire investigator.
The action was dismissed, though damages were assessed at $1,348,939.91 in the alternative.
