skip to Main Content

INSURANCE COVERAGE: District Court grants insurer’s motion for summary judgment where cracking in concrete foundation constituted “collapse” within policy definition but was not sudden or accidental loss

INSURANCE COVERAGE: District Court Grants Insurer’s Motion For Summary Judgment Where Cracking In Concrete Foundation Constituted “collapse” Within Policy Definition But Was Not Sudden Or Accidental Loss

The plaintiffs brought suit against their homeowner’s insurer alleging breach of contract and violations of CUIPA and CUTPA when a claim for repair related to their cracking concrete foundation was denied.

The Court granted the insurer’s motion for summary judgment.  It found that while the damage to the foundation constituted collapse under the policy’s ambiguous definition, it was not a sudden and accidental loss and was thus not covered under the policy.  As such, the insurer did not breach its contract and there was no CUIPA or CUTPA violation.

Carney v. Allstate Ins. Co, No. 3:16-cv-00592 (09/20/2018)

Interested in more information?
Contact us now for experienced and professional legal counsel.

This is Attorney Advertising. This web site is designed for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.