Split On Calif. Code Upgrade Coverage Remains Unresolved

An appellate court recently interpreted the law and ordinance exclusion to preclude coverage when the enforcement of a law or ordinance is the actual cause of the loss itself rather than a covered peril.

March 18, 2013

Law360, New York (March 18, 2013, 1:17 PM EDT) -- California’s Fourth Appellate District Court recently interpreted the law and ordinance exclusion to preclude coverage when the enforcement of a law or ordinance is the actual cause of the loss itself rather than a covered peril. Reichert v. State Farm Gen. Ins. Co., 212 Cal. App. 4th 1543, 152 Cal. Rptr. 3d 6 (2012). Additionally, the court held that even if the law or ordinance is being enforced due to a third party’s negligence, the loss may still be precluded under the exclusion. Id. at 1549-50, 152 Cal. Rptr. 3d at 10-11.

The articles on our website include some of the publications and papers authored by our attorneys, both before and after they joined our firm. The content of these articles should not be taken as legal advice. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or official position of Robins Kaplan LLP.

Disclaimer

Law360

READ FULL ARTICLE