State Farm Storm Policy Unclear, Judge Says
- Share via
GULFPORT, Miss. — Provisions in a State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. policy that exclude certain damage from Hurricane Katrina are unenforceable, a federal judge has ruled.
A couple whose Long Beach, Miss., home was damaged by the Aug. 29 storm is suing State Farm for denying their claim, arguing that the wording of their policy’s “flood exclusions” are ambiguous and cannot be enforced.
U.S. District Judge L.T. Senter Jr., in a ruling released Wednesday, said State Farm could not rely on “ambiguous” language in a clause that is used to introduce what is excluded from coverage in its policies.
The judge agreed with State Farm that tidal surge is not covered.
However, he said a policy clause that purports to deny coverage when wind acts in any sequence with an excluded event, such as tidal surge, to cause damage is ambiguous.
To the extent State Farm contends the hurricane itself -- the winds and rain -- would constitute a weather condition that would completely relieve the company of liability for damage, Senter said he found “the policy is ambiguous and its weather exclusion therefore unenforceable in the context of losses attributable to wind and rain that occur during a hurricane.”
State Farm spokesman said the insurer was pleased Senter had ruled that excluding tidal surge “is enforceable and valid.”
Senter said the question of how much damage to the couple’s home was caused by wind and water is a fact that must be decided at trial.
No date has been set for the trial, which will be in U.S. District Court in Gulfport.
The lawsuit was filed in November by John and Claire Tuepker of Long Beach, Miss.
It is one of many spawned by a fierce debate over whether homes along the Gulf Coast were destroyed by Katrina’s wind or tidal water.
More to Read
Sign up for Essential California
The most important California stories and recommendations in your inbox every morning.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.