Arthur v. Liberty Mutual Personal Insurance Co.
A magistrate for the Western District of Texas recommended granting an insurer's motion for summary judgment as to extra-contractual claims, but denying the the motion as to the breach of contract claim where the insurer failed to establish as a matter of law that hail damage did not result in a metal roof's failure to to perform its intended function of keeping out the elements.
homeowner's policy, cosmetic damage exclusion, breach of contract, hail damage, intended function, elements, penetration of water, good faith and fair dealing, Chapter 542, Chapter 541
Reviewing the Case Document is for members only. Please login