Also known as: fires · fired · firing · arson · combustion
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
An equitable doctrine under which a binding contract for the sale of land shifts ownership interests so that the buyer bears the risk of loss from destruction of the property by fire before closing. The buyer must still pay the full purchase price even if the property burns. Jurisdictions differ on whether risk passes at contract formation or at closing.
An equitable doctrine under which a binding contract for the sale of land shifts ownership interests so that the buyer bears the risk of loss from destruction of the property by fire before closing. The buyer must still pay the full purchase price even if the property burns. Jurisdictions differ on whether risk passes at contract formation or at closing.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A common-law offense consisting of the malicious burning of the dwelling of another. The elements require malice, an actual burning that damages the fibers of the structure, a dwelling regularly used for sleeping, and occupation by someone other than the defendant.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A common-law offense consisting of the malicious burning of the dwelling of another. The elements require malice, an actual burning that damages the fibers of the structure, a dwelling regularly used for sleeping, and occupation by someone other than the defendant.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
Fatima Flores signed a binding contract to purchase a warehouse from Fisher Foods. Before closing a fire destroyed the building. Under equitable conversion Fatima still owes the full purchase price because risk of loss passed to her at contract formation.
Fernando Farrell contracted to buy land from Fidelity Trust. A fire damaged the structures before closing. Equity treats Fernando as owner of the land and Fidelity as trustee of the purchase money so Fernando bears the loss.
Faith Fitzgerald was fired from Fusion Power after she refused to alter safety reports concerning fire hazards at the plant. She sued claiming the discharge violated public policy protecting whistleblowers.
Farid Farahani owned land that county rules prevented him from rebuilding after a fire destroyed his structures. He claimed the restrictions amounted to a taking requiring just compensation.
In many jurisdictions the buyer bears the risk once a binding contract forms because equitable conversion treats the buyer as owner of the land. The buyer must pay the full price even if the property burns.
Supporting sources
Freya Freeman intentionally set fire to a house she knew her estranged spouse occupied as a home. The flames damaged the wooden beams. Because the structure was used for sleeping by another person and malice was present Freya committed arson.
Felicia Fuentes was convicted of arson after setting fire to an occupied dwelling. The sentencing court found that a person was lawfully inside at the time of the fire. That fact raised the offense grade and increased the maximum penalty.
Malice exists when the defendant intends the structure to burn, knows it will burn, or consciously disregards an obvious and substantial risk that it will burn. Negligence alone is insufficient.
Supporting sources
No. The fire need only damage the fibers of the wood or other combustible material. Mere scorching or smoke blackening is not enough.
Supporting sources
…held a taking); Portsmouth Co. v. United States , 260 U. S. 327 (1922) (United States military installations’ repeated firing of guns over claimant’s land is a taking); United States v. Cress , 243 U. S. 316 (1917) (repeated floodings of land caused by water project is a taking); but see YMCA v. United…