The Sixth Circuit determined that Richelson could not state a claim for breach of contract because Liberty paid ACV for the roof damage. (Credit: Shutterstock) The Sixth Circuit determined that Richelson could not state a claim for breach of contract because Liberty paid ACV for the roof damage. (Credit: Shutterstock)

The Sixth Circuit has ruled that a homeowner cannot reasonably interpret an ACV endorsement to his policy as creating additional coverage for damage to his roof from a windstorm.

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
NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 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.

Coverage & Policy Issues
Litigation