Court Rules Against Katrina Victims

By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Hurricane Katrina, Law, Money

We could call it criminal, another example of a heartless insurance industry, etc. But it looks pretty clear that these people’s homes weren’t covered for flood damage.

From the Chicago Trib:

Allstate Corp. and other insurers won their latest battle over Hurricane Katrina damages as a U.S. appeals court in Louisiana on Thursday ruled against policyholders seeking to recover disaster-related flood damages.

The court ruled that homeowners’ insurance policies weren’t entitled to damages caused by levee breaches that flooded New Orleans during the 2005 disaster. Significant damage occurred when levees along three major canals ruptured. At one point, about 80 percent of the city was underwater.

Typically, most insurance policies exclude damage caused by floods.

But plaintiffs, in what has become known as “Katrina Canal Breaches Litigation,” had contended that the water damage was the result of negligent design, construction and maintenance of the levees and that the policies’ flood exclusions are therefore ambiguous because they don’t exclude coverage for water caused by negligence. Because the policies are ambiguous, the plaintiffs argued, their losses should be covered.

Here in Kansas City, my grandparents’ place sits on a flood plain, and boy did it flood. They could’ve argued that the city didn’t widen the river enough, was negligent in not doing so because this area had flooded before and therefore the insurance company should pay. But I don’t think that’s a valid argument.

The court agrees…

“Regardless of what caused the failure of the flood-control structures that were put in place to prevent such a catastrophe, their failure resulted in a widespread flood that damaged the plaintiffs’ property,” the court said. “This event was excluded from coverage under the plaintiffs’ insurance policies, and under Louisiana law, we are bound to enforce the unambiguous terms of their insurance contracts as written.

You’ve gotta feel for these people. The law is the law, but it doesn’t make the outcomes any less tragic or heartwrenching.


This entry was posted on Friday, August 3rd, 2007 and is filed under Hurricane Katrina, Law, Money. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

4 Responses to “Court Rules Against Katrina Victims”

  1. John Smith Says:

    Earthship Biotecture for New Orleans
    http://neworleans.earthship.net

    The mission:

    * Build a fully sustainable / off grid 3 bedroom demonstration earthship home in six weeks
    * Function as a learning center for 18 months
    * Teach local political & building officials how to build earthships in New Orleans
    * Give the earthship home to a local family who lost their home to Hurricane Katrina

  2. Rich Horton Says:

    “The law is the law, but it doesn’t make the outcomes any less tragic or heartwrenching.”

    I feel for the folks loss in the flood, sure, but their loss in court doesn’t phase me a bit. If they had prevailed in court it would have been ridiculous, and costly for all insurance holders. Besides, insurers are not agents of the state…not even by proxy.

  3. Blogstroll « Ali Eteraz Says:

    [...] rules against Katrina victims, and…in favor of insurance companies. [...]

  4. Eteraz.Org » Why Is There a Moratorium on Foreign Policy? Says:

    [...] world, and a social catastrophe like Katrina (in the aftermath of which insurance companies are still winning). [?] Share This This entry was written by Ali Eteraz and posted on August 4, 2007 at [...]

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: