Court Finds Late Notice an Absolute Bar to Coverage in Property Claim

Posted on March 23, 2026 by Joshua Tumen, Marissa Cunha

In Deja Realty Corp. v. Travelers Indemnity Company of America, 2026 WL 683303 (S.D.N.Y. 2026), the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York granted summary judgment to the insurer, holding that the insured’s year-long delay in providing notice of property damage violated the policy’s condition precedent requiring “prompt notice.” Because New York law does not impose a prejudice requirement in the context of first party property policies, the Court concluded that the insurer’s coverage obligations were extinguished as a matter of law.

About The Authors

Tagged with: claim reporting, coverage denial, New York Insurance Law, notice, property insurance
Posted in Uncategorized

Court Says Ensuing Loss Requires More Than Increased Susceptibility

Posted on February 6, 2026 by Joshua Tumen

In Stella Property Development and Event Production, LLC v. Auto-Owners Insurance Company, 2026 WL 221489 (W.D. Pa. 2026), the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania denied summary judgment as to the applicability of the subject property policy’s (i) wear and tear and (ii) inadequate maintenance exclusions, holding that those issues were to be resolved by the factfinder rather than decided as a matter of law. However, the Court further held that if (i) wear and tear and (ii) inadequate maintenance were ultimately found to be dominant and efficient causes of the roof damage, the ensuing loss clauses would not reinstate coverage because those excluded conditions merely increased the roof’s susceptibility to wind damage, rather than resulting in the windstorm itself.[1]

About The Author

Tagged with: insurance coverage, insurance law, property damage
Posted in Uncategorized

Texas Court Affirms No Duty to Advise on Coverage Adequacy: Key Takeaways from Century Surety’s Win

Posted on December 8, 2025 by Tracey Jordan

In Century Surety Co. v. EC & SM Guerra, LLC, 5:23-CV-01215-XR-RBF, 2025 WL 2602288 (W.D. Tex. Aug. 21, 2025) aff’2025 WL 2598375 (Sept. 5, 2025), the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas reaffirmed the magistrate’s report and recommendation holding that because the insured received a policy with its requested limits, Century did not breach the insurance contract. The Court further held that Century had no duty to advise the insured of the adequacy of the coverage for the insured property.

About The Author

Tagged with: Duty to Advise of Coverage
Posted in Uncategorized

Florida Appellate Court Confirms Insurer Cannot Waive Residency Requirement in Homeowners Policy

Posted on November 24, 2025 by Stephanie Roman

Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal recently clarified the enforceability of the “residence-premises” requirement in homeowners’ insurance policies. In Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company v. Boniface Jean, the appellate court reversed a jury verdict in favor of the homeowner, holding that coverage cannot be created by waiver when the insured does not reside at the covered property.

About The Author

Tagged with: appellate court, Florida insurance, Homeowners policy, insurance coverage, residency
Posted in Uncategorized

Dents Don’t Count: Court Clarifies Hail Damage Coverage

Posted on November 17, 2025 by Joshua Tumen

In Cannon Falls Area Schools v. Hanover American Insurance Company (2025 WL 2976533 (D. Minn. 2025)), the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota held that a property insurer properly denied coverage pursuant to a cosmetic damage exclusion because hail indentations to roofs affected only their appearance, not their ability to function as barriers against the elements. The Court emphasized the roofs’ performance immediately following the loss rather than any speculative future vulnerabilities.

About The Author

Tagged with: hail damage, insurance coverage, property damage
Posted in Uncategorized

Court Interprets “Completion” of a Project Under Builder’s Risk Insurance

Posted on August 18, 2025 by Joshua Tumen

In Luke, Inc. v. Berkley National Insurance Company, 2025 WL 2210783 (W.D. Tenn. 2025), the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee determined that the “completion” of a construction project for purposes of coverage under a builder’s risk policy concerned the permanent physical elements of the structure, and not whether it was fully operational as a business.

About The Author

Tagged with: builder’s risk, insurance coverage, property damage, property insurance
Posted in Uncategorized

Court Differentiates Faulty and Defective Workmanship from Vandalism or Malicious Mischief

Posted on August 5, 2025 by Joshua Tumen

In Carr v. Spinnaker Insurance Company, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the district court’s finding that property damage resulting from objectionable and imperfect work performed by an unlicensed contractor did not constitute covered vandalism or malicious mischief under a property insurance policy. Instead, the loss fit squarely within the policy’s faulty and defective workmanship exclusion.

About The Author

Tagged with: builder’s risk, faulty workmanship, insurance coverage, property damage
Posted in Uncategorized

Southern District Court of New York Permits Extensive Discovery of Reserve And Reinsurance Information in Bad Faith Litigation

Posted on July 31, 2025 by Tracey Jordan

In Mandarin Oriental, Inc. v. HDI Glob. Ins. Co. et al., Civil Action No. 23 Civ. 4951, 2025 WL 1638071 (S.D.N.Y. June 10, 2025), the District Court of the Southern District of New York followed the modern trend and allowed discovery of reserve and reinsurance information in coverage litigation with allegations of bad faith.

About The Author

Tagged with: Bad Faith, Discovery, reinsurance, reserve
Posted in Uncategorized

Insurer’s Use of Conflicting Reports Not Bad Faith, Says Court

Posted on June 12, 2025 by Paul Ferland, Joshua Tumen

In El Dueno, LLC v. Mid-Century Insurance Company (2025 WL 1540329) (10th Cir. 2025)), the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgement on behalf of the insurer on the basis that the insurer did not act in bad faith when it denied the insured’s claim based on an engineering report that contradicted an adjuster’s initial findings.

About The Authors

Tagged with: Bad Faith, insurance coverage, property damage
Posted in Uncategorized

Noncompliance With Policy’s “Duties After Loss” Provision Leads to Denial of Fire Loss Claim

Posted on May 20, 2025 by Lauren Berenbaum

In Caribe D. Billie v. Plymouth Rock Assurance Corp. et al, the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut granted Plymouth Rock Assurance Corp.’s (“Insurer”) motion for summary judgment, holding that the Insurer was prejudiced by its insured’s failure to cooperate with the Policy’s “Duties After Loss” provision.

About The Author

Tagged with: duties after loss, Duty to Cooperate, prejudice, property damage, property insurance
Posted in Uncategorized