The short answer is: when it is a complicated endeavor.
(Image courtesy of NASA)
In Bloxham v. Allstate Ins. Co., No. 3:19-CV-004812020, WL 6710427 (M.D. Pa. Nov. 16, 2020) (Mehalchick, USMJ), a homeowner's insurance carrier denied coverage for a fire loss. The carrier's coverage denial was premised on two related grounds: that the claimant did not "reside" on the covered property and that there were "material misrepresentations" that he did.
The carrier's motion for summary judgment was denied including on a statutory claim of insurer bad faith. The Court's announced reason after reviewing all the evidence on the question of the insured's "residence" in that particular case was this: "Defining and determining the term 'reside' is a complicated endeavor." Bloxham, 2020 WL 6710427, at *8.
The Court did not say so in this case but clearly it came to the conclusion after reviewing all the evidence that this coverage question was fairly or reasonably debatable.
That is the real reason that the carrier's motion for summary judgment based on that coverage question was denied.
Please read the disclaimer. ©2020 Dennis J. Wall. All rights reserved.
Comments