96 results for 'cat:"Insurance" AND cat:"Property"'.
Per curiam, the circuit finds the district court improperly dismissed the insurer's petition to appoint an umpire for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The company refused to pay an additional $349,000 after paying the hail-damaged property owner $61,000 after deductions. The court erroneously concluded the petition did not meet the amount-in-controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction. The company's petition establishes an amount in controversy of more than $75,000, meeting requirements for diversity jurisdiction. Reversed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: May 7, 2024, Case #: 23-10888, Categories: insurance, property, Jurisdiction
J. Gooch finds that the lower court properly found for the title insurer in a suit filed by property purchasers who claim it is obligated to defend them in a suit against the city over the use of a barn constructed on the property by previous owners without a permit. The insurer's actual knowledge of the city's lawsuit prior to the effective date of the title policy does not trigger coverage because court records are not included as the kind of records required for the insurer to review and alert the buyers prior to the property's sale. Affirmed.
Court: Missouri Supreme Court, Judge: Gooch, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: SC100238, Categories: insurance, property
J. Abramson finds the circuit court properly found in favor of the homeowner, who claims the insurer wrongfully denied her fire-damage claim for her not residing in the house at the time of the fire. The applicability of the policy's residency requirement to the “residence premises” definition is ambiguous. Without applying the requirement, the policy covers the claim. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Abramson , Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: CV-22-579, Categories: insurance, property
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. McCalla determines how the funds should be paid in this interpleader case arising from an alleged arson fire and alleged theft at the House of Blues recording studio. One of the individual defendants, who leased a studio and certain equipment from the owner, should receive $2,066,217 of the Business Personal Property award, as his lease "did not terminate with the fire."
Court: USDC Western District of Tennessee , Judge: McCalla, Filed On: April 4, 2024, Case #: 2:20cv2834, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: insurance, property, Damages
J. Dennis finds the district court improperly found for State Farm after it denied coverage for the homeowners' claim arising from the a city's requirement they replace their whole roof, rather than just the tiles damaged in a hailstorm. State Farm accepted coverage for damage to certain roofing components and gutters in its estimate, which admits liability for that damage for purposes of the Texas Prompt Payment of Claims Act. Genuine issues of fact preclude summary judgment on the breach of contract and Act-based claims. Vacated in part.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Dennis , Filed On: April 2, 2024, Case #: 22-10662, Categories: insurance, property
J. Aiken denies the insurance company partial summary judgment against the insureds' complaint alleging that the insurance company did not pay for covered losses such as the insulation remediation in the attic and underflooring of the insureds' home, which suffered smoke damage from wildfires in the Detroit, Oregon area. At this point, a reasonable juror could conclude that the insurance company sent an adjuster that negligently overlooked the damage in the attic and the underfloor area.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Aiken, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 6:22cv1798, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: insurance, property, Contract
J. Molloy denies both parties' motions for summary judgment in an insurance dispute. The property owner, which sought insurance coverage on properties damaged in a hurricane, hired its own adjuster after the insurer's adjuster grossly undervalued the damages, inspecting only the main structure on the property. The breach of contract claim is moot, being the insurer has paid the appraisal award. Material facts remain in dispute with respect to the owner's bad faith claim. The trier of fact must determine whether the insurer knowingly and intentionally excluded three cottages in its alleged coverage determination.
Court: USDC Virgin Islands, Judge: Molloy , Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 3:19cv71, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: insurance, property
J. Rush finds the trial court properly ordered the ex-husband to obtain a life insurance policy to secure the ex-wife’s portion of his police pension. Though the husband challenges the court's authority, saying it did not consider the tax consequences of his future pension payments, trial courts have broad authority to order a security or other guarantee to secure division of property. The court’s evidence-based findings support the judgment. The husband waives his tax consequences challenge due to his presenting the court with only speculation.
Court: Indiana Supreme Court, Judge: Rush , Filed On: March 20, 2024, Case #: 23S-DN-245, Categories: Family Law, insurance, property
J. Estudillo dismisses Highmark Homes' complaint that the insurance companies must cover the former for construction defects. The Condominium, Apartment, Townhouse or Tract Housing Coverage Limitation Endorsement exclusion of the policy applies, because it precludes coverage if an insured constructed 25 or more homes in a development, which Highmark did in the Vintage Hills development.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Estudillo, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: 3:21cv5280, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: insurance, property, Contract
J. Kunselman finds that the lower court improperly found that the sellers of a restaurant breached their contract with the buyer in this case wherein the restaurant burned down after the parties signed a sales agreement but before they closed on the deal. The record is devoid of any competent evidence regarding the post-fire value of the property. Vacated.
Court: Pennsylvania Superior Court, Judge: Kunselman, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: J-E03003-23, Categories: insurance, property, Contract
J. Heavican finds the tax review commission improperly upheld the board's decision to decline to lower the assessed value of real property owned by the insurance company. A fire caused by arson was found not to be a "calamity," as defined by Nebraska statute, and the value was left at the property's assigned assessment of $793,000. The statute excepts any “property suffering significant... damage... caused by the owner.” If a “calamity” did not include all disastrous events, natural or unnatural, it would be unnecessary to except damage caused by an owner. Reversed.
Court: Nebraska Supreme Court, Judge: Heavican , Filed On: March 8, 2024, Case #: S-23-289, Categories: insurance, property, Tax
J. Chen dismisses AmGuard from a lawsuit seeking payment under a homeowners insurance policy for losses to a Brooklyn residential property due to a fire. The litigant in this case, the mortgagee of record, lacks standing because it transferred the mortgage note to a non-party entity before filing suit. The court further dismisses counterclaims filed by the property’s owners, finding the policyholder failed to return an executed proof of loss form within the required 60-day period, so the insurer was in its right to deny coverage for the losses.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Chen, Filed On: March 6, 2024, Case #: 1:20cv5990, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: insurance, property
J. Immergut finds in partial favor of the insured in his complaint alleging that the insurance company wrongfully denied his claim for property damage caused by a landslide. The insurance company denied coverage by citing the land-and-earth-movement exception in the insured's homeowner policy. However, the owned property exception does not apply because the City of Portland ambiguously claims that the insured needs to stabilize nearby third-party property to stabilize his own property.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Immergut, Filed On: March 5, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv191, NOS: Other Personal Property Damage - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: insurance, property
J. Weissmann finds that the trial court properly ruled for the insurer in claims seeking coverage for theft because the policy contained an exclusion for dishonest acts performed by someone entrusted with the property, and theft of the tools had been committed by the company's employee. Affirmed.
Court: Indiana Court Of Appeals, Judge: Weissmann, Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: 23A-PL-995, Categories: insurance, property
J. Grasz finds a lower court properly granted an insurance company's motion for summary judgment concerning coverage claims brought by a warehouse. The warehouse operator argued that its policy with the insurance company covers property damage liability for the collapse of a building during a deadly tornado. However, the insurance company sufficiently showed in court that it is not obligated to cover damages given that Amazon is the actual owner of the facility. Affirmed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Grasz, Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: 23-1450, Categories: insurance, property, Contract
J. Rothstein dismisses the property manager's complaint alleging that the insurance company wrongfully denied the property manager's damage claim regarding Covid-19 infesting the Washington State Convention Center. The property manager is not entitled to coverage because the Washington Supreme Court already concluded that a loss of functionality only occurs when the property is physically affected, not when the property manager could not conduct normal business.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Rothstein, Filed On: February 27, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv1386, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: insurance, property, Covid-19
J. Rice finds that the district court properly concluded that a title company was not contractually liable to provide title insurance based on pro forma documents it created showing that it would issue title insurance on the subject properties. The documents expressly instructed that insurance would be issued only after further requirements were met. Affirmed.
Court: Montana Supreme Court, Judge: Rice, Filed On: February 27, 2024, Case #: DA 22-0486, Categories: insurance, property, Contract
J. Immergut grants partial summary judgment to the insured in his complaint that the insurance company wrongfully denied his claim for property damage caused by a landslide, which the insurance company denied by citing the land-and-earth-movement exception in the insured's homeowner policy. The declaration of the insurance company's adjuster is inadmissible hearsay because it presents out-of-court statements as truth, and the owned property exception does not apply because the City of Portland's claims for what the insured needs to do to make his property stable are too ambiguous for exceptions to apply.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Immergut, Filed On: February 12, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv191, NOS: Other Personal Property Damage - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: insurance, property