Most water damage is covered in a typical homeowner’s policy. However, this coverage may only extend to the structure, and not the personal property, depending on the policy language. This is because many homeowner’s policies cover all forms of direct physical loss – subject to certain exclusions. Conversely, personal property may be covered by only
Coverage Issues
Winston Churchill and the Burden of Proof in an Arson Case
We all have heard Churchill’s commencement speech in 1941 where he included those famous words “never give in, never give in, never, never, never…” Brandon put an entry on the blog below about the burden of proof in an arson case, relying upon a case in which he was involved styled Cincinnati v. Banks. …
Insurance Companies Bear the Burden of Proving Arson
Back in November 2013, I had the great honor to represent Larry and Sue Banks in their case against Cincinnati Insurance Company. My partner, Clint Scott, and I presented the case to a federal jury and after deliberations, the jury returned a verdict for more than $2.2 million. The insurance company accused the Banks of…
When it Comes to Insurance Policies, There is No Difference in Cosmetic Damage and Functional Damage
In the past, I’ve posted a few articles regarding the recent trend of insurers to attempt to deny hail damage claims on the basis that the damage is “cosmetic” rather than “functional.” Most commonly, the issue arises when there are hail dents to a metal roof and the insurance company denies the claim on the…
SUIT AGAINST US CLAUSE APPLIES TO ALL CLAIMS INCLUDING FAILURE TO PROCURE
The Court of Appeals recently issued its opinion in Maples v. Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Co., E2015-00285-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. 2015). The Maples case dealt with fire damage to the Maples’ home in Crossville, Tennessee, insured with Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company. Coverage was denied on August 26, 2013. Suit was filed on August…
“MAKE AVAILABLE” DOES NOT REQUIRE INSURERS TO OFFER SINKHOLE COVERAGE
Tennessee has a statute, T.C.A. § 56-7-130, concerning insurance company requirements with respect to providing sink hole coverage and handling sink hole claims. The statute was recently amended, and prior to July 1, 2014, was the subject of much litigation. At issue was whether the statute requiring insurance carriers to “make available” sink hole coverage …
The Law of Matching in Tennessee
A hail storm hits a shingled roof, but only damages a handful of shingles. Unfortunately, the shingles on the roof are no longer manufactured, which would result in a mismatched checkerboard of colors on the roof if only the few damaged shingles were replaced. In those circumstances, is the insurance company obligated to replace the…
Cosmetic Damage – Honest Disagreement or Reckless Misbehavior?
Insurance companies are increasingly denying claims based on engineering reports that there is “no functional damage” (damage which impairs the functionality of the roof) and that the damage is “cosmetic only.” For example, if a hail storm comes through and wreaks havoc on a metal roof to a home, it might still be functional even…
Insureds Have Obligations Too
In this age where assaults against policy conditions are common, it is good to see a court recognize that an insured has an obligation, and a burden, when seeking to recover insurance benefits. In Meyers v. Farm Aid Association of Loudon County, No. E2103-02585-COA-R9-CV, filed December 9, 2014 (download Meyers v. Farmers Aid), …
New Hampshire Ins. Co. v. Blackjack Cove, LLC, Part III
This is my last post on Judge Sharp’s recent decision in New Hampshire Ins. Co. v. Blackjack Cove, LLC (the opinion can be viewed here) – – unless Parks decides to pick a fight with me about the case. In this installment, I’m going to focus on a small section of the opinion involving…