5th Circuit rules for Nationwide in Katrina case. Take home message:
The company says its anti-concurrent causation provision works this way: If a policyholder has wind coverage and not flood insurance, then the company is not responsible for damage that comes from a combination of wind and water. A ruling that the clause is ambiguous could have been used against the company in lawsuits involving so-called "slab cases," in which a home was reduced to its foundation, Hartwig said.
As noted in a previous post, the federal court has also ruled that insurance companies are not liable for flood damage - the court did not distinguish between the flood as a result of the levees being overcome (water topping the levees) and the levees being breached (levees were broken and let water through). However, there is a pending case in the state court going to trial in September that may reverse the decision.
And although I am a bit belated in posting this, following the previous LA Citizens discussion, here is the link to their, uh, press release, if you will, confirming their extension of the prescription deadline to September 4 and the other details to go along with it.
No comments:
Post a Comment