04 | 11 | 2007 Posted By David Rossmiller

Update on Weiss v. Allstate case in Louisiana

I haven't been able to devote my usual massive allotment of time to blogging this week due to other commitments which are keeping me at the office until unholy hours more fit for vampires and werewolves than a lawyer with a wife and three small kids at home.  However, I'm doing my best to keep informed and keep you informed: here's another good story on Katrina litigation developments from Lavonne Kuykendall of Dow Jones Newswires.  
Written By:Jeff Layman On April 11, 2007 12:12 PM

Its possible that I'm missing something here, but it looks like the insured was indemnified. While the insureds haven't come right out and said it, it appears that they are trying to "double-dip" in both their NFIP and Homeowner's policies. If you're not familiar with insurance contracts, keep in mind that they are designed in such a way that they only indemnify the insured, or restore the insured to the condition they were in prior to the loss. Unless the insureds were attempting to profit from their insurance, i see no incentive for litigation. Since the insured has already been indemnified, any dispute between allocation of coverage would be a matter of subrogation between the NFIP and Allstate.

Written By:Kirt Clark On November 28, 2007 5:31 PM

Question? If I get a policy for $100.000.00 and my house is destroyed,what are the odds of me getting the full policy amount? For what reason should I not get the full amount? If I don't get the full amount of my policy, why should I increase?

Written By:David Rossmiller On November 28, 2007 9:19 PM

Here's one reason -- what destroyed your house might not be covered by your insurance contract. For example, if you torch it yourself, or it is destroyed by earthquake, or by a flood.