Overview and update on Corban v USAA

Marilyn Haverty, whose house in Waveland, Miss., was buffeted by wind and surging water in Hurricane Katrina, thought her homeowner’s insurance would cover at least the wind damage. But it never paid her a penny…

The insurance companies say they paid for damage to homes in areas where there was no flooding. Where there was flooding, they say, they paid for damage that could have come only from wind, like the loss of a roof and broken upper-story windows — above the highest marks left by flood waters. But they have generally refused to pay for damage to houses, or parts of houses, that were hit by both wind and flood water…

From the NYT’s August 2006 Small Clause, Big Problem, fast forward (or slow forward, as it turned out to be) to  Spring 2008 and Sop’s three posts on Corban v USAA – The Absurdity of Judge Jones’ Reasoning Manifested (April 18); Corban v USAA Makes the News (May 13); and, The State Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Corban (May 20).

Sop used Anita Lee’s story in the Sun Herald for background in his April post and it’s well worth repeating.

The Mississippi Supreme Court is being asked to decide whether Katrina’s wind damage is covered when tidal surge contributes to the loss.

Attorneys filed the appeal Thursday in Corban vs. USAA Insurance Agency. USAA covered only $39,972 of damage to the Long Beach home of Magruder S. and Margaret Corban, whose policy exceeded $1 million in total coverage. Their home near the waterfront was a near-total loss, although portions remained standing. Continue reading “Overview and update on Corban v USAA”