Here's a pdf of the opinion, just out. Not much time right now to blog, but for now, this excerpt at the end of the case says it all: We REVERSE the judgment of the district court entering JMOL in favor of the Broussards. We REVERSE and VACATE the jury’s award of punitive damages. We AFFIRM the district court’s admission of testimony from the Broussards’ expert witness. We AFFIRM the district court’s denial of State Farm’s motion to change venue. We REMAND the case for a new trial.
Read...Related Headlines
- Nationwide v. Leonard: Fifth Circuit upholds anti-concurrent cause provision as unambiguousposted 247 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- Fifth Circuit hears arguments in Leonard v. Nationwide Katrina appealposted 250 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- State Farm, homeowners settle Katrina case in Mississippi state courtposted 241 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- In Re Katrina Canal Breaches Litigation: More on Fifth Circuit's decision, did the Court hint how it will go on Tuepker?posted 251 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- Landry v. Citizens Property: Louisiana Court of Appeals sows confusion, messes up causation analysis in Hurricane Rita cposted 246 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- More on Northrop Grumman v. Factory Mutualposted 247 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- California U.S. District Court says Katrina storm surge is not excluded by excess policy's flood exclusionposted 247 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- Commentary on Fifth Circuit's decision in Tuepker v. State Farmposted 237 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- Yet more anti-concurrent cause misunderstandingposted 245 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
Colorado Court of Appeals: anti-concurrent cause provision bars coverage where covered snow combined with uncovereposted 198 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog