Leonora Morrow et al. v. Imperial Fire & Casualty Insurance Company

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana granted Imperial Fire & Casualty Insurance Company’s motion for summary judgment in a flood-insurance dispute arising from alleged Hurricane Francine damage. The court held that the plaintiffs’ untimely proofs of loss could not support recovery of additional amounts under the Standard Flood Insurance Policy and that their extra-contractual claims were preempted or otherwise unavailable. Plaintiffs’ claims were dismissed with prejudice.

Holdings

1. An insured seeking to recover an additional amount on a preexisting Standard Flood Insurance Policy claim must submit a separate proof of loss that strictly complies with the SFIP, including the 60-day deadline. Because plaintiffs' timely proof of loss was paid in full and their proofs seeking additional damages were submitted after the deadline, Imperial was entitled to summary judgment on the breach-of-contract claim.
2. Plaintiffs' extra-contractual claims could not proceed because state-law tort claims arising from claims handling by a Write Your Own insurer are preempted by federal law, and neither the National Flood Insurance Act nor the SFIP authorizes extra-contractual claims against WYO insurers. The claims also did not survive because coverage was resolved in Imperial's favor.
3. Summary judgment was appropriate because plaintiffs failed to identify competent evidence creating a genuine dispute of material fact on their entitlement to additional policy benefits or extra-contractual damages.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiffs could recover additional flood-insurance benefits based on proofs of loss submitted after the SFIP's 60-day deadline when the timely proof of loss had been paid in full.
2. Whether plaintiffs' extra-contractual claims against a Write Your Own flood insurer were preempted and otherwise unavailable under federal flood-insurance law.
3. Whether Imperial was entitled to summary judgment on plaintiffs' jury demand.

Disposition

dismissed