IMBER, Justice.
At issue in this property insurance case is whether the insurer effectively cancelled a vacancy permit issued to the insured. The appellants argue that the trial court erroneously granted summary judgment to the appellee. The appellants also argue that the trial court misconstrued Ark.R.Civ.P. 56. We find no error and affirm.
On April 20, 1995, a building owned by the appellants, Mary and Robert Schultz, was damaged by fire. Prior to that date...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
