BI’s Article search uses Boolean search capabilities. If you are not familiar with these principles, here are some quick tips.

To search specifically for more than one word, put the search term in quotation marks. For example, “workers compensation”. This will limit your search to that combination of words.

To search for a combination of terms, use quotations and the & symbol. For example, “hurricane” & “loss”.

Login Register Subscribe

Appeals court indulges in puns in water damage decision

water damage

A federal appeals court on Wednesday did not even try to resist having some punning fun in affirming a lower court ruling in favor of a Hartford Financial Services Group Inc. in litigation filed by a realty company.

The issue in the case, Bradford Realty Services Inc. v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co., was whether losses caused by water that backs up from a sewer or drain fall under a policy exclusion for rain damage.

The U.S. District Court in Lubbock, Texas, ruled in the insurer’s favor. “Thirsting for relief,” Dallas-based Bradford appealed, arguing the ruling was “all wet,” the appeals court decision said.

Bradley’s arguments do not hold “water, rain, or any combination thereof,” the ruling said, though, in holding the water damage falls within the coverage’s rain exclusion.