The Fifth Circuit ruled that a flood exclusion in an insurance policy means that the policyholder cannot get insurance money for damage to property caused, interestingly enough, by a flood. Only in the US could the plaintiffs' bar get away with bringing this type of lawsuit and forcing insurers to pay to defend it (which means we all pay because the insurers aren't running a dang charity -- they'll offset those costs with our premiums).
Howard Bashman has the links to both the AP report and the Fifth Circuit decision ruling against Katrina victims who sued their insurers and claimed that "flood" didn't apply to damage caused when the levees broke -- you know, when there was a flood.
No comments:
Post a Comment