I happened to be up late Monday night reading the Court of Appeal's decision, so it was fresh on my mind when the Louisiana Supreme Court handed down its decision Tuesday morning. Here's a copy of the Supreme Court's decision, and here's a copy of the Court of Appeal decision.Now, take a look, at the flood exclusion in the policy, it's the standard form ISO version:
1. We will not pay for loss or damage caused directly or indirectly by any of the following. Such loss or damage is excluded regardless of any other cause or event that contributes concurrently or in any sequence to the loss:
g. Water. Flood, surface water, waves, tides, tidal waves, overflow of any body of water, or their spray, whether driven by wind or not . . . .
OK, now let's read what the Court of Appeal, Fo
Read...Related Headlines
- Fifth Circuit hears arguments in Leonard v. Nationwide Katrina appealposted 235 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- Landry v. Citizens Property: Louisiana Court of Appeals sows confusion, messes up causation analysis in Hurricane Rita cposted 232 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- More on Northrop Grumman v. Factory Mutualposted 232 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
Reaction to Sher case
posted 200 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- Louisiana Fourth Circuit finds flood exclusion ambiguousposted 220 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
Louisiana Fourth Circuit finds flood exclusion ambiguous
posted 220 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
Landry Valued Policy Law: Louisiana Supreme Court rules for Citizens Property
posted 194 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
- Initial impressions on Fifth Circuit's decision in In Re Katrina Canal Breaches Litigationposted 236 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog
-
Colorado Court of Appeals: anti-concurrent cause provision bars coverage where covered snow combined with uncovereposted 183 weeks ago on Insurance Coverage Blog