A court of the Eastern District of Texas adopted a magistrate’s recommendation to grant an insurer’s motion for summary judgment and dismiss the insured’s claims alleging unpaid policy benefits resulting from Hurricane Laura, finding that the insured’s proffered evidence from a designated expert did not constitute competent evidence where the expert’s report was merely an estimate and series of photographs and where a proffered email from that expert included conclusory statements that failed to appropriately distinguish between damages “covered” under the policy and those merely “caused” by the hurricane.
Reviewing the Case Document is for members only. Please login