VANDALISM, RIOT, OR CIVIL COMMOTION–A DISCUSSION
(June 2019)
|
|
INTRODUCTION
The riot or civil commotion cause of loss is distinct and separate from the vandalism cause of loss, but they share some similar characteristics. This article attempts to differentiate them from one another by examining their definitions and reviewing court precedents related to them.
DEFINITIONS
Vandalism
This is the willful, wanton or malicious destruction of public or private property. Black's Law Dictionary adds the word "ignorant" to this definition and specifically refers to destruction of property of an artistic or literary nature. It refers to hostility or contempt for what is beautiful or venerable. It goes on to state that vandalism connotes acts of a vandal but that in ordinary usage it has a broader meaning that includes destruction of property in general. Vandalism is usually done in a stealthy manner and is not part of a group or mob action.
Related Court Case; Animal Damage Held Not Covered By Vandalism and Malicious Mischief Peril
Riot
This is a wild or turbulent disturbance created by a large number of people. It is a violent disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons assembled for a common purpose. It is also referred to as a general disturbance or a public assembly of a group of people who commit acts of violence or who threaten violence. It includes looting by participants who steal merchandise or other property from premises damaged and entered. Black's Law Dictionary refers to it as a public disturbance that involves either of the following:
- “An act or acts of violence by one or more persons making up part of an assemblage of three or more persons, which act, or acts shall constitute a clear and present danger of, or shall result in, damage or injury to the property of any other person or to the person of any other individual
- A threat or threats to commit an act or acts of violence by one or more persons part of an assemblage of three or more persons having, individually or collectively, the ability of immediate execution of such threat or threats, where the performance of the threatened act or acts of violence would constitute a clear and present danger of, or would result in, damage or injury to the property of any person or to the person of any other individual.”
It goes on to state that a person is guilty of riot if he or she participates with two or more others in a course of disorderly conduct in any of the following ways:
- With purpose to commit or facilitate committing a felony or misdemeanor
- With purpose to prevent or coerce official action
- When the actor or any other participant to the knowledge of the actor uses or plans to use a firearm or other deadly weapon
Black's Law Dictionary ends its definition of riot by referring to unlawful assembly.
Bouvier's Law Dictionary suggests that five elements are necessary to constitute a riot:
- Three or more persons must be involved.
- There must be a common purpose.
- There must be an actual inception or execution of that purpose.
- There must be an attempt to help one another or to cooperate by force if necessary.
- There must be a display of force or violence such as to alarm a person of reasonable courage.
Civil commotion
This is a disturbance among, or a popular uprising of, a large number of people. Some court decisions describe it as "an uprising among a mass of people which occasions a serious and prolonged disturbance and an infraction of civil order, not attaining the status of war or armed insurrection. It requires the wild or irregular action of many persons assembled together." Its definition is usually combined with riot because there is no meaningful distinction between them.
RELEVANT COURT CASES
The following cases define riot or civil commotion:
- State and Federal Courts define riot as "the wild or irregular action or tumultuous conduct on the part of three or more persons assembled together for the purpose of performing an unlawful act". Kirshenbaum v. Mass. Bonding Co., 186 N. W.325 (Nebraska)
- Civil commotion is "an uprising among a mass of
people which occasions a serious and prolonged disturbance and an
infraction of civil order, not attaining the status of war or armed
insurrection. It requires the wild or irregular action of many persons
assembled together.” (11 C.J. 795). Hartford Fire Insurance Company v.
War Eagle Coal Co., 295 Fed 663 (Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth
Circuit). Other cases that illustrate the same point are O'Quinn et
ux. v. State, 148 S. E. 618, Borus v. Imperial Assurance Company, 224 N.
Y. S. 136, and Insurance Company of North America v. Rosenberg, et al., 25
Fed. (2d) 635.
The last two citations above relate to civil actions brought to recover under riot and civil commotion coverage. Both incidents refer to the same essential elements referred to as being necessary to constitute a riot.
The Borus case held that the destruction of finished garments during a pending strike by "three or more" sympathizers who, acting in concert, unlawfully trespassed upon the manufacturer's premises and threatened to kill the employees if they resisted, was sufficient to constitute a "riot attending a strike" within the meaning of riot and civil commotion coverage.
The Rosenberg case established liability by the testimony that certain persons gained access to and entered a clothing manufacturer's loft "in a rowdy fashion" and poured acid over the stock, although it does not appear that there was any actual tumult or disturbance.
- A 1992 California Court of Appeals decision, North Bay School Authority v. Industrial Indemnity Company, clarified the difference between riot and vandalism and the importance and significance of the difference. Four people broke into two of the insured's neighboring buildings on three separate occasions over a five-hour period. They vandalized the property and set fires. The court found that such acts, committed out of public view, by four people with the intent of not being observed, did not constitute a riot.
Definitions of vandalism are provided in these relevant court cases:
- Vandalism is willful or ignorant destruction of property, especially artistic or literary treasures. It includes hostility to (or contempt for) what is beautiful or venerable. Unkelsbee v. Homestead Fire Ins. Co. of Baltimore, D.C. Mun.App., 41 A.2d 168, 170, 172
- Vandalism connotes acts of a vandal and in ordinary usage is not limited to destruction of works of art but has broadened its meaning to include destruction of property generally. Eis v. Hawkeye-Security Ins. Co., 192 Kan. 103, 386 P.2d 206, 210
- Vandalism within the dwelling policy means the willful and malicious destruction of property generally. The destruction must have been intentional or in such reckless and wanton disregard of the rights of others as to be equivalent of intent, and malice may be inferred from an act of destruction. Livaditis v. American Cas. Co. of Reading, Pa., 117 Ga.App 297, 160 S.E.2d 449,450
DISCUSSION
Cases of civil unrest range from the simple single incident to mass demonstrations orchestrated and choreographed for maximum effect.
Examples:
- Violent street behavior accompanies a meeting of the World Trade Organization.
- Demonstrations occur in a neighborhood over a child custody dispute.
- Labor disputes lead to strikes that escalate into acts of violence.
- Police action shootings in large urban centers result in turmoil and bloodshed.
- Demonstrations and disturbances accompany enforcing immigration policies as well as immigrants protesting events in their native countries.
- Environmentalists and other activists gather to protest and engage in various acts of civil disobedience.
The list goes on and on. Many of these events involve damage to commercial property of businesses and personal property of homeowners who may or may not be the targets of such events.
Property owners, businesses, and individuals ask many questions about these events and the coverage that applies. Commercial property, homeowners, and dwelling property policies generally cover losses caused by riot and civil commotion. Insurance companies and agents can respond to these questions by reviewing the applicable coverage forms and causes of loss or perils involved. Coverage applies to direct physical loss or damage caused by riot or civil commotion, regardless of the causes of loss or perils insured form used.
A question frequently asked is whether coverage applies to merchandise, and other property removed from the business in the course of a riot. Everyone is familiar with these acts that appear on the evening news or are reported in the morning newspaper. The answer is that coverage applies to looting that occurs at the time and place of the occurrence. This loss must occur only at the time that the rioting or civil commotion itself takes place. For example, coverage does not apply if looters enter an unprotected store damaged by a riot that ended three days earlier.
The only exclusions that specifically apply to loss or damage caused by riot or civil commotion are for war, civil war, insurrection, rebellion, attack, and defense of any government that uses military personnel or other agents. Because no insurance coverage form or policy defines the terms riot and civil commotion, the statutory meanings, dictionary definitions, and judicial interpretations must be examined for accurate meanings. It must be noted that there is virtually no distinction between riot and civil commotion. Because the coverage uses both terms, its intent is to apply in cases where a given occurrence might be excluded if only one term or the other is used.
The elements necessary to determine if an event is a riot or civil commotion are always the same, regardless of whether the proof is brought out in a civil action or a criminal proceeding. Using the criteria outlined above, a single or random act of destruction without a common purpose is defined as vandalism or malicious mischief, while coordinated acts of violence and destruction with a common purpose are defined as riot and civil commotion.
This distinction is especially important when applying the commercial lines vacancy clause because that clause excludes acts of vandalism to buildings vacant for 60 or more consecutive days. The same clause covers loss or damage caused by a riot or civil commotion, subject to a 15% penalty.
Related Court Cases:
Vandalism and Arson in Area Held Not To Be "Riot"
Theft Exclusion in Vandalism Coverage Provision Barred Coverage