The New York Supreme Court recently weighed in on what constitutes “reasonable care” to maintain heat in the context of a first-party insurance policy exclusion requiring such reasonable care. In Michael Zimmerman v....more
Given the vast number of proposals to close “the protection gap” offered by regulators, reinsurers, insurers, brokers and other industry participants in recent years, it is a wonder that it persists. But to many observers, it...more
Flood exclusions may not apply when floods are preceded by winds strong enough to independently cause the loss, according to a recent decision issued by the Western District of Louisiana. In Doxey v. Aegis Security Ins. Co.,...more
Chances are, if you live in Florida, you have seen a billboard or heard an advertisement about water damage or pipe lawsuits. For some time, insureds have filed claims and lawsuits alleging repair costs that frequently...more
New York Court Reaffirms That Contractor’s Defective Work Is Not A Covered “Occurrence” Anthony and Sandra Tamer hired RD Rice Construction (“Rice”) as a general contractor to gut and rebuild their combined residential...more
In S.O. Beach Corp. v. Great American Insurance Company of New York, No. 18-1967 (11th Cir. Oct. 31, 2019), the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in full to the insurer, finding there...more
A recent ruling in a U.S. District Court in Missouri may suggest a new path for policy exclusions based on “continuous or repeated seepage or leakage of water.” The Court rejected the argument that the continuous or repeated...more
The Fifth District Court of Appeal recently issued a decision that will likely force homeowners insurance carriers to rewrite one of their stalwart policy exclusions that pertains to “constant or repeated seepage or leakage”...more
In Cameron v. Scottsdale Insurance Company, No. 17-11907, 2018 WL 1791889, at *1 (11th Cir. Apr. 16, 2018), the Eleventh Circuit vacated the lower court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the insurer and relied on...more
Florida first-party property insurers have seen a dramatic rise in the number of reported water loss claims over the past five years. ...more
The “Water Damage” exclusion incorporated in many property insurance policies is the subject of much litigation, including the scope and applicability of the “surface water” exclusion to various water damage scenarios....more
Hurricane Nate made landfall on the Mississippi Gulf Coast near the city of Biloxi on Sunday, October 8, 2017, as a Category 1 Hurricane. The eastern quadrant of the storm’s center also passed over significant portions of...more
The Washington Supreme Court, often described as pro-policyholder, issued a unanimous decision in favor of an insurance company on June 9, 2016: Lui v. Essex Insurance Company, No. 91777-9 (Wash., Jun. 9, 2016). Addressing a...more
An exclusion in a homeowner’s policy for loss resulting from “water . . . below the surface of the ground” is not limited to naturally occurring water, according to a recent decision of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in...more
Two weeks ago in Wheeler v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2015 WL 5714392, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131736 (C.D.Utah, Sep. 29, 2015), a Utah court barred coverage for a mold loss caused when a vacant log cabin suffered a long-term water...more
Last July, we posted that an intermediate level appellate court in Iowa had held that a policy excluding loss “caused by rain” did not bar coverage for loss occasioned by the non-excluded peril of “rainwater.” ...more
In Platek v. Town of Hamberg, et al., 2015 WL 685726, 2015 N.Y. LEXIS 252 (N.Y., Feb. 19, 2015), the New York Court of Appeals held that an exclusion for water below the surface of the ground was unambiguous and operated to...more
Last week, in Pichel v. Dryden Mutual Ins. Co., — N.Y.S. 2d —, 2014 WL 1923736 (May 15, 2014), an intermediate level appellate panel in New York brought the state into line with the interpretation of water backup adopted by a...more