Once again, a reported decision highlights the reach of holdings that demonstrable physical injury must be proven in order to trigger property insurance policy coverage under some policies. In Am. Fam. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Coyne, ___ F. Supp. 3d ___, No. 4:18-CV-139 RLW, 2022 WL 6990186, at *6 (E.D. Mo. Oct. 12, 2022), the relevant Homeowners Policy defined covered "property damage" to mean "'[p]hysical damage to or destruction of tangible property, including the loss of use of this property.'" The claims against the policyholder did not trigger coverage in this case under this policy.
In Coyne, the policyholder allegedly represented before selling her house that the house had an attached two-car garage, in pertinent part. The underlying plaintiffs-purchasers moved in after their purchase of the house. It was then that they "learned that they could not fit their two vehicles in the attached garage." Coyne, 2022 WL 6990186, at *1. Perhaps understandably, they sued.
Under the liability portion of the Homeowners Policy, the Court held that there was no duty to defend:
The Court holds that the Bockmans cannot demonstrate any physical injury to their garage or Property, which would be covered under the Homeowners Policy. The garage and Property are in the same condition as they was prior to their purchase. The only damage was to the Bockmans’ personal expectations.
Coyne, 2022 WL 6990186, at *6.
As there was no coverage in this case, so there was no viable bad faith claim in this case, either. The coverage claims were resolved by the Court when it entered summary judgment for the carrier and dismissed the purchasers' claims with prejudice. Coyne, 2022 WL 6990186, at *7.
Please read the disclaimer. ©2023 Dennis J. Wall. All rights reserved.
Comments