Rayne Memorial United Methodist Church v. Church Mutual Insurance Company, S.I.

Rayne Memorial United Methodist Church · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana · May 8, 2026 · No. 23-4129

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana denies Church Mutual Insurance Company’s renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law and alternative motion for a new trial following a jury verdict in favor of Rayne Memorial United Methodist Church. The court holds that sufficient evidence supported the jury’s findings concerning Hurricane Ida causation, breach of the insurance contract, statutory bad faith, misrepresentations, and consequential damages. The court further concludes that the defendant failed to preserve its objections to the jury instructions and verdict-form questions concerning partial payments and consequential damages, and that those issues did not warrant a new trial.

Court
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana
Writing for the Court
Susie Morgan
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana
Decision date
May 8, 2026
Docket number
23-4129
Procedural posture
Following a jury verdict for the insured in a Hurricane Ida insurance coverage action, the insurer moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(b) for judgment as a matter of law or, alternatively, under Rule 59(a) for a new trial.
Standard of review
Judgment as a matter of law is appropriate only when there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for the nonmovant and the evidence points so strongly and overwhelmingly in the movant's favor that reasonable jurors could not reach a contrary conclusion. The court may not weigh evidence, assess witness credibility, or disturb the jury's factual conclusions. A new trial under Rule 59(a) is an extraordinary remedy used sparingly and may be granted for an unfair trial, a verdict against the weight of the evidence, excessive damages, or prejudicial error. Evidentiary rulings and admission of expert testimony are reviewed for abuse of discretion.
Precedential value
unpublished district-court order; limited precedential value
Parties
Church Mutual Insurance Company, S.I. v. Rayne Memorial United Methodist Church
Disposition
other

Topics

insurance coverageinsurance bad faithmotion for new trialmotion for directed verdictcivil procedure

Practice areas

insurance coverageinsurance bad faithcivil procedureevidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Church Mutual was entitled to judgment as a matter of law because the evidence was insufficient to support the jury's findings concerning causation, mitigation, the amount due under the policy, arbitrary and capricious conduct, or misrepresentation.
  2. Whether Church Mutual waived its Rule 50(b) challenges by failing to raise them adequately in its Rule 50(a) motion.
  3. Whether the jury instruction concerning penalties under Louisiana Revised Statutes § 22:1892 was erroneous or prejudicial because it omitted language addressing partial payments or tenders.
  4. Whether the inclusion of consequential-damages questions in the verdict form warranted a new trial.
  5. Whether the court committed reversible error in admitting the insured's expert testimony and hurricane videos or excluding the insurer's unauthenticated videos.

Holdings

  1. Church Mutual was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law because legally sufficient evidence supported the jury's findings on causation, mitigation, the amount owed under the policy, arbitrary and capricious conduct, and misrepresentation.
  2. Church Mutual did not waive its Rule 50(b) arguments because it raised those arguments, or substantially similar issues adequate to provide notice of the alleged evidentiary insufficiency, in its Rule 50(a) motion.
  3. The omission did not warrant a new trial because Church Mutual failed to preserve the objection and, in any event, the partial-payment language in Louisiana Revised Statutes § 22:1892(B)(1)(b) was inapplicable where the payments were not timely made within thirty days after satisfactory proof of loss.
  4. The inclusion of consequential-damages questions did not warrant a new trial because the objection was not preserved and Louisiana Revised Statutes § 22:1973 permits recovery of damages resulting from an insurer's bad-faith breach, including consequential damages.
  5. The court did not commit reversible error in admitting Marcel Fournet's expert testimony or the hurricane videos, or in excluding Church Mutual's unauthenticated videos; none of the challenged rulings caused the prejudice required for a new trial.

Key quotations

A party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law ‘only if the evidence points but one way and is susceptible to no reasonable inferences which may support the opposing party’s position.’
The Court does not “weigh evidence, judge witness credibility, or challenge the factual conclusions of the jury.”
The Fifth Circuit has made clear that the partial payment language in La. R.S. 22:1892 “applies if (and only if) the insured’s partial payment complies with the statutory requirements—namely, it is tendered “within thirty days after receipt of satisfactory proofs of loss from the insured.”
To allow otherwise would “read out the statute’s time-limit requirement” and “permit insurers who had untimely paid 100 percent of a[n] insured’s claim to avoid statutory penalties.”

Factual background

Rayne's church complex in New Orleans was insured by Church Mutual when Hurricane Ida struck southeastern Louisiana on August 29, 2021. Rayne alleged that the hurricane damaged several buildings and that Church Mutual failed to timely pay amounts due under the policy, made misrepresentations concerning coverage, and acted arbitrarily and capriciously. The jury found that Church Mutual owed additional policy benefits, failed to timely pay amounts after satisfactory proof of loss, violated Louisiana's insurance bad-faith statutes, and caused $123,935 in consequential damages.

Procedural history

Rayne sued Church Mutual for breach of an insurance contract and statutory penalties and attorney fees under Louisiana Revised Statutes §§ 22:1892 and 22:1973. After a four-day jury trial, the jury found that Church Mutual breached the policy, violated both statutes, and caused consequential damages; the court entered a $4,567,441.68 judgment. Church Mutual then moved for judgment as a matter of law or a new trial, and the court denied both requests.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…