In Brooks v. Tenn. Farmers Mut. Ins. Co., 2014 Tenn. App. LEXIS 776 (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 26, 2014), an insured’s home was damaged by a tornado and an independent adjuster hired by the insurance company offered the homeowner $56,788 to resolve the claim. The homeowner disagreed with the estimate and refused to settle
Tennessee insurance lawyer
The Law of Matching in Tennessee
By Brandon McWherter on
Posted in Claim Tips, Coverage Issues
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?
By Brandon McWherter on
Posted in Bad Faith, Coverage Issues
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…
Is Cosmetic Roof Damage a “Direct, Physical Loss?”
By Brandon McWherter on
Posted in Bad Faith, Coverage Issues
I recently represented the owner of a commercial property in a hail damage claim in which the metal roof was clearly dented by hail. Remarkably, the insurance company denied the claim on the basis that the roof was still functional. In the process of working with the opposing lawyer to obtain payment, I ran across…
Punitive Damages for Failure to Pay on an Insurance Policy?
By Brandon McWherter on
Posted in Bad Faith
The issue of whether punitive damages are available to an insured when an insurance company wrongfully denies a claim was recently addressed by the Tennessee Court of Appeals in Riad v. Erie Insurance Exchange. Over the years, this issue has been confused by many state and federal courts in Tennessee, but the Riad court…
Commas and Sentence Structure are Important After All
By Brandon McWherter on
Posted in Coverage Issues
The Tennessee Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Artist Building Partners v. Auto Owners Mut. Ins. Co. serves as an important reminder in coverage disputes that any ambiguities will be strictly construed against the insurance company and in favor of coverage. Tennessee courts have made clear over and over again that any language in an…
What Constitutes a True “Coverage” Issue in Appraisal?
By Brandon McWherter on
Posted in Appraisal
With the proliferation of appraisal demands, the ins and outs of appraisal in Tennessee will begin to take shape through the judiciary. In Artist Building Partners v. Auto-Owners Mut. Ins. Co., the Court of Appeals recently made clear that it will not disturb the binding nature of an appraisal award.
For a little history…
The Law of California Applies to an Insurance Policy Insuring Tennessee Property?
By Brandon McWherter on
Posted in Coverage Issues
Practitioners should be aware that Tennessee courts generally apply the law of the state where an insurance policy was issued and delivered if there is no enforceable choice of law clause in the policy. Gov’t. Employees Ins. Co. v. Bloodworth, 2007 Tenn. App. LEXIS 404 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). So, for example, if a policy…
Should a Deductible Be Subtracted in the Case of a Total Loss?
By Brandon McWherter on
Posted in Valued Policy Law
Consider this scenario – – Jane Doe insures her home for $100,000, with a $1,000 deductible. Unfortunately, Jane’s house burns to the ground and is undeniably a "total loss" within the meaning of Tennessee’s valued policy statute (click here for a prior post on when a loss should be considered a "total loss"). After months…