PropertyCasualtyFocus

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe
You are here: Home / Archives for Flood

Flood

Florida Insurance Reform Special Session 2 – This Time Means Business

January 27, 2023 by Benjamin Stearns

Between 2017 and 2022, 11 property & casualty insurers domiciled in Florida were declared insolvent and placed into liquidation. In an attempt to restore stability to the marketplace, Governor Ron DeSantis issued a proclamation on April 26, 2022, calling the Florida Legislature into special session to reform Florida’s Insurance Code. While the ensuing May special session yielded significant changes, including amendments designed to reduce fraudulent roof claims and ... Keep Reading »

Fifth Circuit Determines a Deductible Buyback Policy Was a Named Perils Policy for Hurricane Harvey Flood Damage

March 1, 2022 by J. Kent Crocker

picture of flooded living room

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently reversed a federal Texas court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the insured, holding that its “deductible buyback policy” was a “named perils” policy that did not provide coverage in relation to the insured’s flood-related damage sustained by a commercial building during Hurricane Harvey. The insured’s primary “all-risks” policy, which provided insurance for several of the insured’s properties, had a high ... Keep Reading »

Flooded: Court Finds “Named Windstorm” Coverage, and Not Flood Sublimit, Applies to Superstorm Sandy Water Damage Claim

February 28, 2020 by Daniel G. Enriquez

When the National Weather Service names a storm heading in your direction, you know to expect wind and water. This can create a quandary for property insurers. Is water damage from a named windstorm caused by the flood or the storm? This distinction can mean millions. In New Jersey Transit Corp. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London, a three-judge panel from the Superior Court of New Jersey held that the New Jersey Transit Corp. was entitled to $400 million in ... Keep Reading »

Destination Arbitration: Court Holds Service-Of-Suit Clause Does Not Conflict With Policy’s Arbitration Requirement

May 17, 2019 by Daniel G. Enriquez

Arbitration Agreement

Coverage disputes often come down to the interplay between endorsements and the body of the policy. But this tension is not limited to terms addressing coverage. It can also extend to areas such as dispute resolution. In Southwest LTC-Management Services, LLC v. Lexington Insurance Co., No. 1:18-cv-00491-MAC (E.D. Tex. Apr. 17, 2019), the court held that a service-of-suit endorsement did not supersede the arbitration clause in the policy. A group of carriers paid $2.5 ... Keep Reading »

Opening the Pandora’s Box of Flood Policies, or How Filing Suit Against Flood Insurers Can Effectively Reduce the Suit Limitations Period

February 16, 2018 by Jason Morris

When is an insurer’s “Rejection of Proof of Loss” letter for flood insurance damage, which states on its face that it “is not a denial of your claim,” nevertheless a written denial of claim? According to the Third Circuit in Migliaro v. Fidelity National Indemnity Ins. Co., No. 17-1434 (3d Cir. Jan. 29, 2018), the answer is whenever “the policyholder treats it as such by filing suit against the carrier.” If a flood policyholder treats a proof of loss rejection as a claim ... Keep Reading »

Postdiluvian Perils: Second Circuit Weighs Coverage For Losses Suffered After The Waters Recede

September 23, 2016 by Heidi Hudson Raschke and Robert D. Helfand

National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Aspen Specialty Ins. Co.

“[N]ow I only hear/ Its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar,/ Retreating, to the breath/ Of the night-wind, down the vast edges drear/ And naked shingles of the world.” — Matthew Arnold As this blog has reported, exclusions and limits for flood coverage have generally held up against the tide of claims arising from Superstorm Sandy.  Now that the water is gone, however, new losses have been discovered, and new challenges arise.  Last month, in National Railroad ... Keep Reading »

Coverage Not Limited to Schedule of Locations in Fight Over Dam Liabilities

May 1, 2015 by Matthew Burrows

Picture of the Ka Loko Dam breach

In C. Brewer & Co., Ltd. v. Marine Indem. Ins. Co. of Am., No. SCWC-28958 (Haw. Mar. 27, 2015), the Supreme Court of Hawaii ruled that liability coverage is not limited to only those locations defined in an insurer's schedule of locations.  The court found that because a causal connection could be established between the negligent decisions of a business proprietor and the liabilities stemming from those decisions elsewhere, coverage could be applied irrespective of ... Keep Reading »

A Unilateral Scrivener’s Error Can Reflect a Mutual Mistake Requiring Policy Reformation (or, Don’t Expect $20 Million in Additional Coverage Without Paying Additional Premium)

October 30, 2014 by Heidi Hudson Raschke

Picture of Scrivener of the Ferrers Household

It is, of course, an indispensable part of a scrivener's business to verify the accuracy of his copy, word by word. - Herman Melville October 29 marked the second anniversary of Superstorm Sandy's assault on New York and New Jersey.  Although the insurance litigation arising from this storm is just beginning, we have already seen a number of decisions out of New York that limited coverage, based on applicable flood sublimits. Last month, in Cammeby's Management ... Keep Reading »

With Sewers Backing Up, Messy Damage Claims are On the Rise

September 25, 2014 by John C. Pitblado

Picture of Men Working in a Sewer

Andy crawled to freedom through five hundred yards of - - - smelling foulness I can't even imagine. Or maybe I just don't want to. Five hundred yards. The length of five football fields. Just shy of half a mile. –The Shawshank Redemption (1994) Many homeowners and other property insurance policies contain an exclusion to address one of the by-products of the increased frequency of severe weather: it bars coverage for property damage caused by "water which backs up ... Keep Reading »

A Flood by Any Other Name is Still a Flood – or Why Losses Caused by Flood Are Subject to Flood Sublimits

August 13, 2014 by Heidi Hudson Raschke

Picture of an Ocean and Dark Sky

Lawyers are students of language, and they have a reputation for building arguments out of long-ago lessons of grammar and language arts.  That reputation is not undeserved.  Something as small as the placement of a comma can have a significant impact on coverage.  But, at the end of the day, insurance contracts are intended to be enforced on the basis of their plain language.  Two recent decisions from New York courts uphold this proposition in the context of applying ... Keep Reading »

  • 1
  • 2
  • Next Page »
Carlton Fields Logo
A blog focused on legal developments in the property-casualty industry by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Get Weekly Updates!

Send Me Updates!

Focused Topics

  • Additional Insured
  • Bad Faith
  • Business Interruption
  • Class Action
  • Construction/Builder’s Risk
  • Coronavirus / COVID-19
  • Cybersecurity
  • Declaratory Judgment
  • Duty to Defend
  • Environmental
  • Flood
  • Homeowners
  • Occurrence
  • Pollution/Pollutant
  • Property
  • Regulatory
  • VIEW ALL TOPICS »

Recent Articles

  • Third Circuit Holds Harassment Exclusion Bars Coverage for Sexual Assault Suit Under Pennsylvania Law
  • Tenth Circuit Interprets Excess Policy’s Definition of “Medical Incident” as Applying to the Injuries of One Single Person
  • Divided Ninth Circuit Finds Claimant’s Failure to Provide Medical Records Insulates Insurer From Bad Faith Failure to Settle

Carlton Fields

  • carltonfields.com
  • Practices
  • Industries
  • ExpectFocus Magazine

Related Industries/Practices

  • Insurance
  • Financial Lines Insurance
  • Property & Casualty Insurance
  • Financial Services & Insurance Litigation

About PropertyCasualtyFocus

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
© 2014–2025 Carlton Fields, P.A. · Carlton Fields practices law in California as Carlton Fields, LLP · All Rights Reserved · Privacy Policy · Disclaimer

Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please contact us. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites. This site may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Web Design by Espo Digital Marketing