The Mississippi Supreme Court shined in its analysis of the term “concurrently.”
At the top of the SLABBED blogroll and now dear to our heart as well, Insurance Law Hawaii writes Corban Presents Well-Reasoned Analysis of Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause:
Having now read the full Corban decision, I am impressed with the clarity of the analysis set forth in the opinion. See Corban v. United Services Automobile Assoc., 2009 Miss LEXIS 481 (Miss. Sup. Ct. Oct. 8, 2009). The Mississippi Supreme Court carefully considered the facts, offered a common sense analysis to the anti-concurrent causation clause, and determined the provision had no application to the facts at hand. The case has implications for Hawai`i because homeowners’ policies issued here typically include an anti-concurrent causation clause. Continue reading “Insurance Law Hawaii reviews Corban decision – Impressed with the clarity of the analysis”
Dean Starkman’s very fine writing about the insurance industry’s response to Hurricane Katrina, Insurance Transparency Project blog, continues to be an invaluable resource for SLABBED. In fact, it was my search for something he’d written that led me to the Columbia Journalism Review where I found (much to my delight) SunHerald’s Lee, Times-Pic’s Mowbray: Still on it
One of the true pleasures of reporting on the insurance industry’s response, or non-response, to Hurricane Katrina was meeting, and reading the reporting of, the principal Gulf-area papers’ reporters on the insurance angle, Rebecca Mowbray of the Times-Picayune and Anita Lee of the SunHerald of Gulfport and Biloxi, Miss.
It is heartwarming to see them still on the case, four years later. It is heartbreaking to read what they are reporting.
Mowbray: “Report dubs FEMA poor watchdog”
That one, from September 22, is about how the government fails to supervise the private insurers who administer the federal flood program under a “private-public partnership” (always a good idea to check your wallet when you read those words):
That’s for expenses, people. Insurers under this program bear no risk. What financial product comes with a 66% load? Continue reading “Dean Starkman – SunHerald”
Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court to stay these proceedings pending
a ruling from the Mississippi Supreme Court in Corban v. United Services Automobile Association, et al No. 2008-IA-00645-SCT.
The latest development in Politz v Nationwide is the Motion to Stay filed by Mrs. Politz and Nationwide’s Response in Opposition filed today before the noon deadline set by Judge Senter who shortly thereafter issued an Order denying the Politz motion.
None the less, Corban has been the “elephant in the room” since the Mississippi Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. At the end of this post is a linked list of background information, including the summary Overview and update on Corban v USAA.
How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time! Start with this quote from the Appeal and dig in!
…the lower court concluded “the anticoncurrent causation clause will be applied herein as interpreted by the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, thereby barring coverage under the homeowner’s policy for any damage caused by water as defined in the policy or caused concurrently or sequentially by wind and water in combination”.
One has to wonder how the Fifth Circuit could come up with such a convoluted decision. InPlainly Ambiguous: Have Plain English Laws Made Insurance Policies Less Ambiguous?, David Rossmiller explains that such results are intended. Continue reading “The Corban Conundrum: The elephant in the room (updated)”