Court rules the more reasonable interpretation of the term “hurricane occurrence” is the loss had to have been caused by the hurricane.

Florida Farm Bureau General Insurance Company (Farm Bureau) appealed an order granting summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, Richard and Nancy Jones. The order found the hurricane deductible in the policy issued by Farm Bureau could not be applied to the loss caused by an unrelated, local hailstorm that occurred during a “hurricane occurrence.” The case involved the interpretation of a calendar year hurricane deductible endorsement in the policy which permitted the carrier to apply the hurricane deductible for an “event of the first windstorm loss caused by a single hurricane occurrence.” The endorsement defined “hurricane occurrence” as a period that “[b]egins at the time a hurricane watch or warning is issued for any part of Florida” and “[e]nds 72 hours following the termination of the last hurricane watch or hurricane warning issued for any part of” the state. 

The parties agreed the loss at issue occurred during a “hurricane occurrence.” The issue was that the hurricane, Hurricane Isaias, was making its way through New England at the time an unrelated, local hailstorm caused damage to the insured property in Jacksonville, Florida. The Fifth District Court of Appeals took issue with the the fact that the policy provided coverage for a “hurricane occurrence,” which was defined as a time period, stating hurricanes and windstorms cause losses, “time periods do not.” The carrier argued the loss occurred during a “hurricane occurrence” as defined by the policy and, therefore, it was irrelevant that the hailstorm that caused the loss was unrelated to Hurricane Isaias. The court rejected this argument, finding that the carrier’s interpretation of the policy would require the court to change the term “caused by a single hurricane occurrence” to “during a single hurricane occurrence,” which the court did not find reasonable. The court ruled the more reasonable interpretation of the term “hurricane occurrence” was that the loss had to have been caused by the hurricane, affirming the lower courts ruling in favor of the insureds.  

_{Legal Update for Florida Coverage & Property Litigation – May 2024 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. We would be pleased to provide such legal assistance as you require on these and other subjects when called upon. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING pursuant to New York RPC 7.1 Copyright © 2024 Marshall Dennehey, all rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm. For reprints or inquiries, or if you wish to be removed from this mailing list, contact tamontemuro@mdwcg.com.}