The insured's recovery for flood damage was controlled by the policy's sub-limit. David S. Brown Enters. v. Affiliated FM Ins. Co., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 239208 (D. Md. Dec. 18, 2020).      Roughly 6.6 inches of rain fell in Ellicott City, Maryland, causing extensive flooding. During the storm, a water main broke on Main Street, in relatively close proximity to the insured's two properties on Main Street. The foundations of the two properties washed away.     The insured, David S. Brown Enterprises (DSB), had a business owners' policy with Affiliated with covered 204 named locations. The Main Street Properties were not listed, but the policy also provided certain coverage for unnamed locations. The sub-limit applicable to unnamed locations was $1,000,000. The sub-limit for flood, however, was $50,000, annual aggregate "as respects Errors & Omissions, Off-Premises Service Interruption, Unnamed Locations and Supply Chain combined." Affiliated paid $50,000 for the loss based upon the $50,000 Flood annual aggregated Sub-Limit for Unnamed Locations. DSB disagreed that the $50,000 sub-limit applied and filed suit.      Cross-motions for summary judgment were filed. DSB first argued that the flood and water main break were two occurrences that allowed DSB to reap the benefit of two different sub-limits. The court disagreed.  The policy defined occurrence as "the sum total of all loss or damage of the type insured, including any insured Business Interruption loss, arising out of or caused by one discrete event of physical loss or damage . . . " Here, there was one discrete event of physical loss or damage - the foundations of the Main Street properties were destroyed by water. Two causes appeared to have contributed to that discrete event: the water main break, which created or exacerbated a channel near the Main Street properties, and the floodwaters which flowed into that channel, mixed with the water from the water main, and caused the damage. They amounted to one occurrence.     Regarding the applicability of the sub-limit, DSB argued that all four of the coverages - Errors & Omissions, Off-Premises Service Interruption, Unnamed Locations and Supply Chain combined - had to be implicated simultaneously, in conjunction with a flood. This would be impossible, however. Errors & Omissions coverage and Off-Premises Service Interruption coverage required "physical loss or damage" at an insured location, while Supply Chain coverage required physical loss or damage at a different location. Therefore, the $50,000 sub-limit applied. 

from Insurance Law Hawaii https://ift.tt/3uB2FDM