Legal Opinion · Dissent

Turner Construction Company v. Ace Property & Casualty Insurance Co., Docket No. 04-6641-Cv

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided October 28, 2005No. 52Published

1DissentStraub, Circuit Judge

I respectfully dissent. In my view, the plain language of the policy indicates that rain is not an independent “Covered Cause of Loss” and that damage caused by rain entering through a wind-created opening is properly understood as wind damage subject to the wind deductible. This reading is confirmed by the commonly understood scope and nature of “windstorm” protection in the Texas insurance industry, and, in my view, the majority’s finding of ambiguity (and application of the rule of contra proferentum) is contrary to how a reasonably knowledgeable observer would view the policy.

The…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh v. CBI Industries, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Sun Oil Co. (Delaware) v. MadeleyTexas Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Public Utility Commission of TexasCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2000
  4. Intratex Gas Co. v. Puckett, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1994
  5. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. v. MorganTexas Supreme Court · 1966

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API