MS: Court rules for policy holders in Katrina case
The MS Supreme Court gave Katrina victims a little hope with their recent ruling on wind vs. water damage:
The court decided, first, that “concurrent” means happening at the same time, so for the effects of water concurrent with any other cause to be excluded, they must have been simultaneous. This means that if wind came in just before tidal force, the damage from the wind is not excluded as concurrent. As more-or-less a corollary, the court decided that a loss occurs at the moment it, um, occurs. This means that wind damage is a loss and later damage from another excluded cause does not make it any less so. Second, the court decided that the insured has the initial burden to prove there has been a loss, and then the insurer has the burden to prove that the loss is subject to an exclusion from coverage. Thus, the insured shows his or her house is damages, and then the insurer must parse the difference between wind and water damage (which, I’ll add editorially, will likely be an issue for a jury to decide).
via NMissCommentor » The Corbans win on wind and water in the Mississippi Supreme Court.