Issue: The insured was an interior decorator who had been employed to decorate the interior of a bank. She suggested that art objects would enhance the appearance of the Directors’ room. To demonstrate this, she removed several objects from her own permanent collection, which she kept at home, with the intention of placing them in the boardroom. The items were stolen from her car en route. The policy which had been issued to her excluded property "pertaining to business," and the company denied liability for the loss of the art objects on the theory they were "part of a business pursuit."

Judgment: The insured introduced evidence to show that the art objects were "integral " parts of her living room, were not for sale, and had never been offered for sale. They were not samples, and had never been used for business purposes previously.

The court noted that the mere presence of property in a business situation does not necessarily mean that it "pertains" to the business. Since provisions of the policy must be construed in favor of the insured, she was entitled to recover. The court noted that while there might have been a potential business motive in the insured’s mind at the time the property was stolen, the evidence was sufficient to show that the objects were her personal property, had been kept as part of her personal art collection, and were not a part of her business within the contemplation of the policy. The insured’s motion for summary judgment was granted.

Singer vs. National Fire Insurance Co. of Hartford – New Jersey Superior Court – April 28, 1970 (Rough Notes Magazine, October 1970)