The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of the insured's claim for damage to her home caused by collapse. Stewart v. Metropolitan Lloyds Ins. Co. of Texas, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 14221 (5th Girl May 13, 2021).      One evening, the insured was awakened by a loud bang that shook her house. The next morning, she noticed the damage to her home, cracked sheetrock and sunken floors. She cut a hole through her floor and discovered that a couple of joists below her subfloor had broken and fallen away. The insured filed a claim with Metropolitan.      Metropolitan hired an expert who found broken and deteriorated floor joists, deteriorated floor decking, walls not plumb and gaps in the wall-to-ceiling interface. It was determined that the rot in the floor joists and subfloor decking were caused by a combination of termite damage and exposure to moisture over the lifespan of the structure, resulting in the broken floor joists and unlevel floors. The insured's own expert agreed that termite damage and wood rot were the cause of the foundation collapse failure.     The claim was denied and the insured sued. Metropolitan moved for summary judgment. The district court found that the insured did not experience an "entire collapse" as defined in the policy. The insured appealed.     The policy required an "entire collapse" and defined collapse as "an abrupt falling down or caving in of a building or any part of a building." The definition excluded settling, cracking sagging, etc.      The Fifth Circuit noted that "entire" meant "with no element or part excepted" or "complete in degree." A structure merely in danger of future collapse had not yet fallen down or caved in, so it had not suffered an entire collapse. The damage the insured described did not rise to the level of an entire collapse. While the floor was not level, the insured continued to live in her home. The court therefore affirmed the judgment of the district court. 

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