Three industry associations have concluded that a recent denial by a Mississippi court of a motion for dismissal concerning flood damage in Mississippi could end up being a silver lining to a lingering issue about flood versus wind.
Though the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi dismissed the motion brought by Allstate, the American Insurance Association, the National Association of Mutual Insurers, and the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America all agreed that evident in the court's explanation was an understanding of the water damage/flood exclusion in most insurance policies.
The ruling involved the case Buente v. Allstate, which was brought forth in the wake of Katrina. The judge is reported to have acknowledged that any damage from hurricane flood waters would not be covered by the Buentes' policy, which contained the standard flood exclusion. He also found there were issues of fact about what percentage of the damage was caused by flood waters, and how much was caused by wind.
Recommended For You
Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader
Your access to unlimited PropertyCasualty360 content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:
- Breaking insurance news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
- Weekly Insurance Speak podcast featuring exclusive interviews with industry leaders
- Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
- Critical converage of the employee benefits and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, BenefitsPRO and ThinkAdvisor
Already have an account? Sign In Now
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
