The policyholder claimed that the endorsement did not limit "tear-out" expenses, and thus the expenses related to tearing out and accessing the damaged plumbing should not be subject to the $5,000 cap. (Photo: Leonard/Adobe Stock)
On June 29, 2022, Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal issued a favorable decision for insurers, but on its face, the decision may seem to conflict with Fifth District law.
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
© 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.
