Notice provisions in property insurance policies typically require the insured to promptly provide notice of a loss to the insurer. Despite the plain language requiring prompt notice, some jurisdictions require that an insured’s late notice cause some prejudice to the insurer in order to make a finding of no coverage. The court’s decision in De La Rosa v. Fla. Peninsula Ins. Co., 2018 Fla. App. LEXIS 6893 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. May 16, 2018), demonstrates the consequences of failing to provide prompt notice that resulted in prejudice to the insurer.
Continue Reading Late Notice in Florida: Appellate Court Affirms Finding of No Coverage Where Insurer Prejudiced In Determination of Extent of Damage
appellate
The Water Exclusion: New York’s Fourth Department Interprets The Definition of Surface Water
By Stephen Clancy on
Posted in Water Exclusion
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. The New York Appellate Division, Fourth Department recently interpreted the application of the “surface water” exclusion where the source of water was not from natural precipitation. This is the second New York decision to interpret the meaning of “surface water” in the context of a property insurance policy.
Continue Reading The Water Exclusion: New York’s Fourth Department Interprets The Definition of Surface Water
The Definition of “Reside” Under Homeowners’ Policies in Michigan and New York: Two Appellate Courts Provide Further Insight
By Soo Y. Kim on
Posted in Residence
Two appellate courts recently examined the scope of a homeowners policy’s requirement that the insured reside at the property at the time of loss. Both cases involve claims of loss involving a house fire, and in both cases, claims were denied on the basis that the homeowner was not residing at the property at the time of loss. Both court decisions agree that where the homeowners policy requires that the homeowner reside at the property, evidence of simultaneous residence in multiple houses does not necessarily defeat the insured’s claim. However, evidence of actual residence is required.
Continue Reading The Definition of “Reside” Under Homeowners’ Policies in Michigan and New York: Two Appellate Courts Provide Further Insight