Case Name: Ronald W. FALKOSKY, Mary Falkosky, and Scott Falkosky, Petitioners v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent v. Martha G. BEST, Burrell G. Best, and Grace Retail Corporation, Petitioners
Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1993-12-20
Citations: 312 S.C. 210
Docket Number: 23976
Parties: Ronald W. FALKOSKY, Mary Falkosky, and Scott Falkosky, Petitioners v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent v. Martha G. BEST, Burrell G. Best, and Grace Retail Corporation, Petitioners.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Carolina Reports
Volume: 312
Pages: 210–210

Head Matter:
23976
Ronald W. FALKOSKY, Mary Falkosky, and Scott Falkosky, Petitioners v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent v. Martha G. BEST, Burrell G. Best, and Grace Retail Corporation, Petitioners.
(439 S.E. (2d) 836)
Supreme Court
Michael A. Pulliam, for petitioner Grace Retail Corp.; George R. McElveen, III, for petitioners Falkosky; and Ronald E. Alexander, for petitioners Best, all of Columbia.
Edward W. Laney, IV, Columbia, for respondent.
Submitted Dec. 3, 1993.
Decided Dec. 20, 1993.

Opinion:
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI
Per Curiam:
Petitioners seek a writ of certiorari to review the Court of Appeals' decision in Falkosky v. Allstate Insurance Company, — S.C. —, 429 S.E. (2d) 194 (Ct. App. 1993). We grant the writ as to Question I, deny the writ as to Question II, dispense with further briefing and affirm as modified.
This case involves the construction of an exclusion in a homeowner's insurance policy. In reaching its conclusion that the exclusion prevents coverage in this case, the Court of Appeals relied on the standard established in McPherson v. Michigan Mutual Ins. Co., — S.C. —, 426 S.E. (2d) 770 (1993).
However, even if the correct standard is applied, the exclusion prevents coverage in this case. Accordingly, the opinion of the Court of Appeals is
Affirmed as modified.