The defendant insurer brought a motion for summary judgment seeking a declaration that it had no obligation to indemnify the plaintiff for a fire loss that destroyed a vacant commercial building.
The insurer argued the plaintiff breached a policy warranty requiring the building to remain 'fully secured' against unauthorized entry.
The court found the policy language unambiguous and determined that the property was not fully secured, as photographic evidence showed entire sections of the building's walls were exposed without boarding or fencing.
The court granted the summary judgment motion, concluding the insurer had no obligation to indemnify the plaintiff.
