(ROBERT FISK VS. FARM BUREAU)

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT INDEPENDENCE
ROBERT FISK,
909 WEST LEXINGTON RICHMOND, MO 64085
PLAINTIFF,
V.
FARM BUREAU TOWN & COUNTY INSURANCE COMPANY OF MISSOURI,
DEFENDANT.
PLEASE SERVE REGISTERED AGENT:
DAN CASSIDY
701 S. COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65102 
CASE NO.: 04CV213909

PLAINTIFF'S PETITION FOR DAMAGES
Comes now Plaintiff, and for his cause of action against the Defendant, states as follows:
1. That Plaintiff was at all times pertinent herein and is a resident of the State of
Missouri, residing in Richmond, Missouri.
2. That Defendant is an insurance company authorized to conduct business in the State
of Missouri, and conducting business in Jackson County, Missouri and service can
be obtained on the registered agent as referenced above.
3. That Plaintiff was the named insured under a policy of insurance issued by the
Defendant, issued on or about August 22,2003. Said policy was in full force and
effect at all pertinent times herein and such policy was issued to cover, among other
things, losses due to fire. 
4. That on or about May 21,2004, Plaintiff was the rightful owner of a 2004 GMC Sierra Pickup Truck which was being operated by Plaintiff when such vehicle caught fire.
5. That on or about May 21, 2004, the 2004 GMC Sierra was rendered a total loss because of such fire.
6. That Plaintiff reported the fire to the Defendant insurance company and Defendant, over fifteen (15) months after the fire occurred, has still not paid the amounts due and owing under the policy of insurance issued by Defendant.
7. That such practices by this insurance company is a pattern and practice and their
actions have been wilful, wanton, deliberate and vexatious.
8. That the 2004 GMC Sierra had a fair market value of at least $26,000.00 at the time of the fire.
9. That Plaintiff has been forced to incur charges for towing and storage because of the actions of the Defendant and such damages are recoverable by law.
10. That Plaintiffhas duly performed all ofthe conditions ofthe policy on his part to be performed and Defendant has failed and continues to fail and refuse to perform its obligations under such policy.
11. That since the date of the above-described loss and the performance of all of the conditions of the policy on Plaintiff's part to be performed, Plaintiff has demanded the payment from the Defendant in the amount of said loss, which was then and is still due and payable, but the Defendant then, and ever since, has vexatiously refused to pay said Plaintiff for his loss or any portion of said loss thereof.
12. That Defendant's denial and refusal to pay Plaintiff the amounts owed under the
policy of insurance issued by Defendant were and are vexatious and without
reasonable cause, and therefore, pursuant to §375.420 R.S.Mo. And §375.296
R.S.Mo., Plaintiff is entitled to the vexatious penalties contained within said statutes,
including interest, the cost of this action and attorneys fees, in addition to the actual
losses suffered by Plaintiff.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendant in the amount of his actual
losses incurred to date, for additional amounts as are deemed just and proper for vexatious penalties
for Defendant's vexatious refusal to pay Plaintiff's loss, for Plaintiff s reasonable attorneys fees, for
prejudgment interest allowed by statute, and for such other and further relief as this Court deems just
and proper.
WILLIAM L. CARR
MO BAR NO. 40091
3145 BROADWAY KANSAS CITY, MO 64111 (816) 561-2555
(816) 561-3939 Fax
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF

(FARM BUREAU'S ANSWER TO ROBERT FISK)

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT INDEPENDENCE
ROBERT FISK,
Plaintiff,
vs.
FARM BUREAU TOWN & COUNTRY INSURANCE COMPANY OF MISSOURI,
Defendant.
Case No. 05CV-23727 Division No.5 

DEFENDANT'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S PETITION
COMES NOW Defendant Farm Bureau Town & Country Insurance Company of
Missouri (hereinafter known as "Farm Bureau") by and through undersigned counsel and for its
Answer to Plaintiffs Petition state as follows:
1. Admit.
2. Admit.
3. Defendant admits that it issued a policy of insurance to Plaintiff having policy
number APV 0306642 01 and a policy period of 2/22/2004 to 8/22/2004. Defendant denies each
and every remaining allegation contained in paragraph 3 of Plaintiffs Petition.
4. Denied.
5. Defendant is without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations
contained in paragraph 5 of Plaintiff s Petition and therefore denies same.
6. Denied.
7. Denied.
8. Denied.
9. Denied.

10. Denied.
11. Denied.
12. Denied
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
13. For further answer and for Defendant's first affirmative defense, Defendant states
that Plaintiff's Petition fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
14. For further answer and for Defendant's second affirmative defense, Defendant
states that investigation of Plaintiff's claim led to the reasonable belief and conclusion that the
alleged loss was intentionally caused by the Plaintiff or at his direction. Accordingly, there is no
coverage and Plaintiff is barred from recovery under the policy.
15. For further answer and for Defendant's third affirmative defense, Defendant states
that Defendant's investigation into the facts and circumstances surrounding Plaintiff's claim led
to a reasonable belief and conclusion that the Plaintiff made false statements regarding the
claimed loss, engaged in fraudulent conduct, and intentionally misrepresented the facts and
circumstances surrounding the claimed loss. Accordingly, there is no coverage and Plaintiff is
barred from recovery under the policy.
16. For further answer and for Defendant's fourth affirmative defense, Defendant
states that there is no coverage for Plaintiff's claimed loss pursuant to the following provision
contained in the policy:
PART D - COVERAGE FOR DAMAGE TO YOUR AUTO INSURING AGREEMENT
A. We will pay for sudden, accidental, and direct loss to your covered auto or any non-owned auto, including its equipment, minus any applicable deductible shown on the Declaration Page. 
17. For further answer and for Defendant's fifth affirmative defense, Defendant states
Plaintiff breached the following policy condition:
CONCEALMENT, FRAUD, OR MISREPRESENTATION
We do not provide coverage for any insured who has concealed any fact, made fraudulent statements, misrepresentation, or engaged in fraudulent conduct in connection with any application for insurance, accident, or loss for which coverage is sought under this policy.
18. For further answer and for Defendant's fifth affirmative defense, Defendant states
that Plaintiff is barred from recovery under policy number APV 0306642 01 (hereinafter known
as "Policy") due to Plaintiffs failure to provide all material facts required to properly assess
insurability of Plaintiff. As such, the Policy is void ab initio due to such material
misrepresentations.
WHEREFORE, having answered Plaintiffs Petition, Defendant prays that this court
dismiss Plaintiffs Petition with prejudice, for its costs and expenses incurred herein, and for
such and further relief as the court deems just and proper under the circumstances.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED