Corban v. USAA: Reinterpreting the Anti-Concurrent Causation Clause
On October 8, 2009, the Mississippi Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, held that a homeowner’s insurer may be liable for a portion of the plaintiffs’ more than $1 million estimated cost for storm damages to their home from Hurricane Katrina. The decision addressed two important issues regarding post-Katrina claims. In favor of insurers, the decision approved a lower court and prior federal decisions that held that a "water damage" exclusion precludes coverage for hurricane-driven water (also known as "storm surge"). However, the Supreme Court, contrary to two decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, determined that the "anti-concurrent causation" clause in the policy in question was ambiguous and did not preclude coverage for hurricane losses due to wind damage that happened in sequence with water damage.