Skip to main content

Insurance Coverage: No Winners in Decision by NY High Court

On February 19, 2015, the New York Court of Appeals issued a decision denying two homeowners coverage for water damage caused by a water main that burst ("exploded"?) next to their house in Erie County. The water flooded their finished basement and caused $110,000 in damage.

The homeowners filed a claim with their homeowners insurance company, Allstate. Allstate denied the claim, saying the policy did not cover damage caused by water "on or below the surface of the ground, regardless of its source". The homeowners sued Allstate for breach of contract (the insurance policy) and their local town (Hamburg) for negligence. The homeowners argued that the insurance policy does cover water damage caused by "explosions", and the water main "exploded".

The homeowners won in the lower court (Supreme Court) and on appeal. But New York's highest court sided with Allstate and said, sorry for your $110,000 in damage, homeowners, but the policy language is "unambiguous", and the policy does not cover water damage caused by under-the-surface water. And we don't think the water main "exploded" in the way you are arguing.

It's a shame. By the strict reading of the law and the insurance policy, the Court of Appeals probably got it right. BUT...courts have a toolbox filled with tools. They can justify any result in any case with the tools they have available and sometimes reach decisions as a way of forcing settlements. The insurance company ultimately "won" on paper but probably spent more than $110,000 defending the case anyway. There are no true winners here.





Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Know Your Rights: Money/Remedy at Law vs. Equitable Relief

When you bring a lawsuit (or some other kind of action or proceeding) in court, you are asking the court to give you some kind of relief. Generally speaking, that relief is either money (called "damages" or "money damages" or a "remedy at law") or equitable relief. Everyone knows what money is. What is "equitable relief"? It is relief other than money. Some examples of equitable relief (or "relief at equity" or an "equitable remedy") are:  specific performance of a contract -- you entered into a contract with another party for them to do something; they failed to do it; you sue them to force them to perform as they agreed to in the contract an injunction -- you bring an action to make another party do something or stop doing something rescission of contract -- you entered into a contract; you believe there is a problem with the contract, or the other side committed fraud, or the other side can't perform its oblig...
Post a Comment
Read more

Respond to Demands for Evidence or Be Prepared to Have Your Case Thrown Out!

The evidence or fact-gathering phase of a lawsuit is called "discovery". Each party is entitled to demand various kinds of evidence from the other party or parties in preparation for a possible trial. Two common kinds of discovery demands are a "Demand for Discovery and Inspection" and "Interrogatories" (which are written questions, answered in writing, under oath). (Psst: Interrogatories are basically a waste of time, but that will be left for another day.) In a recent decision , a New York appeals court affirmed the ruling of a lower court, throwing out a case for plaintiff's failing to respond to defendants' discovery demands. In that case, an LLC sued an architecture firm for malpractice and breach of contract. During the discovery phase, defendants architects served plaintiff with a Demand for Discovery and Inspection and Interrogatories. You only have 20 days to respond or object to discovery demands, or you lose a lot of rights in how yo...
Post a Comment
Read more

Consumer Law Update: FTC sues DIRECTV for Deceptive Business Practices

I'm sure most people think that "of course" big businesses are constantly, intentionally, ripping people off and are engaged in deceptive business practices. As a lawyer, my inclination is I can't believe a big business, with lots of executives and lots of lawyers looking things over, could possibly offer promos or services that are so misleading or deceptive that they are illegal. They can't possibly be that dumb. Sometimes I'm wrong. For instance, the Federal Trade Commission has sued DIRECTV in San Francisco federal court for engaging in deceptive and misleading business practices in violation of federal law. DIRECTV was telling consumers, hey, look at our low monthly rates and look at all the great stuff you get, come sign up with us! However, DIRECTV failed to adequately disclose that, oh, by the way, in order to get that great deal, you have to sign a two-year contract; those low rates are only good for the first year; your monthly bill could go ...
Post a Comment
Read more