Under New Jersey law, an insurer cannot be held liable for bad faith in denying an insurance claim if the claim is “fairly debatable.” Therefore, unless a plaintiff can establish a right to summary judgment on the underlying cause of action for breach of contract, the coverage denial is considered “fairly debatable” and the court must dismiss the bad faith claim. See Pickett v. Lloyd’s, 131 N.J. 457, 473 (1993); Tarsio v. Provident Ins. Co., 108 F. Supp. 2d 397, 401 (D.N.J. 2000).
Continue Reading District of New Jersey Finds Post-Denial Communications By Insurer’s Counsel Insufficient to Sustain Bad Faith Claim
water damage
The Protective Safeguards—Heat Maintained Endorsement Means What it Says: Eastern District of New York Grants Summary Judgment For Loss From Frozen Pipes
By Daniel Bryer on
Posted in Freezing Exclusion
Typical first party property policies include provisions that address failure to maintain heat as excluded losses. The Eastern District of New York recently analyzed a specific endorsement requiring that heat be maintained at a particular temperature.
In Read Prop. Group LLC v. Hamilton Ins. Co., No. 16-4573, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54734 (E.D.N.Y. Mar.…
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