Administrative regulations enacted pursuant to a state statute often impose strict deadlines by which insurers are required to perform a variety of tasks, including the prompt issuance of a reservations of rights, notification of coverage determinations, and advising of an insured’s right to file a complaint with the state’s insurance department. Often overlooked is the
Caryn Daum
Hurricane Sandy: Consumer Group Advocates for Blocking Use of Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause
On November 6, the Consumer Federation of America sent a letter to elected officials in states affected by Hurricane Sandy in which it suggests that regulators should “block application” of anti-concurrent causation clauses:
A typical anti-concurrent causation (ACC) clause might read, “[w]e will not pay for loss or damage caused directly or indirectly by any…
Hurricane Sandy Insurance Claims: What Insurers Should Focus On
Insurers are starting to deploy adjusters to handle claims from Hurricane Sandy. An article in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal reports that “Disaster-modeling firm AIR Worldwide estimates the industry’s share of losses at $7 billion to $15 billion. At the high end of that range, Sandy would become the third-most expensive storm for insurers in U.S.…
Assignment Does Not Relieve Insured’s Obligation To Submit To Examination Under Oath (EUO) According To Florida Court of Appeal
A Florida court of appeal recently held that an insured’s assignment of a claim did not relieve her of the obligation to appear for an examination under oath (EUO). This decision is significant because it makes a distinction between an assignment of proceeds of a property insurance policy and an assignment (or transfer) of the…
Hurricane Isaac Insurance Claims Adjustment: Insights from Katrina
As insurance companies begin the process of adjusting Hurricane Isaac insurance claims, we thought it would be helpful to highlight briefly on our blog some of the key case law from Hurricane Katrina, and some key Louisiana statutes regarding insurance claim adjustment:
- Water Damage Exclusions: The Louisiana Supreme Court ruled in Sher v. Lafayette Insurance
…
Florida Federal Court Declines to Retroactively Apply 2011 Amendment to Sinkhole Insurance Statute
As state legislatures enact statutory amendments, courts are frequently tasked with deciding whether those amendments are to be applied retroactively. In one such case, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida was tasked with deciding whether a 2011 amendment to Florida’s sinkhole insurance statute, Fla. Stat. §627.706(2)(k)(2011) (hereinafter the “Statute”),…
Collapse Additional Coverage vs. Rust/Corrosion Exclusion: New York Federal Court Finds No Evidence of Collapse and Finds The Exclusion Applies
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York was recently tasked with deciding on summary judgment whether: (1) a rooftop water tank and its supporting steel frame structure “collapsed” due to hidden decay, which would have been a covered cause of loss, or (2) the loss was caused by rust or…
Florida Statute of Limitations for Breach of Insurance Policy: Under New Florida Statute, Claims Will Accrue On Date of Loss
The statute of limitations for bringing suit against a property insurer may be far shorter for policies issued after May 17, 2011, under Florida law. As a Florida federal court recently explained in West Palm Gardens Villas Condo Assn v. Aspen Specialty Ins Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104861 (S.D. Fla. June 25, 2012),…
Sewer Backup Exclusion Found Unambiguous by Rhode Island Supreme Court
As mentioned previously, there appears to be an influx of court cases arising from situations where heavy rainfall affects drain and sewer systems, resulting in property damage. The Rhode Island Supreme Court was recently tasked with handling such a case, reaching the same conclusion as the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court did in Boazova and Surabian …
Surface Water Exclusion Applicable to Sewer and Drain Backup Based on Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause, According to Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
For the second time in two months, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court was called upon to decide whether or not property damage was covered when the damage resulted from a combination of a covered peril and an excluded peril. Once again, the court upheld the policy’s enforceable anti-concurrent causation language, finding that coverage was precluded.…