Insurance After Sandy: Seeking Coverage in Face of Flood Exclusions

, New York Law Journal


John N. Ellison, Richard P. Lewis Jr. and Lauren A. Angelucci of Reed Smith review three distinct yet related positions that policyholders whose properties were damaged by water may be able to pursue: that the wind that forced the water to inundate the property was the actual cause of the loss, that their policy does not specifically include the phrase "storm surge" in the definition of flood, and that, if wind is not accepted as the sole cause, it at least partially caused the loss under a concurrent causation analysis.

This article has been archived, and is no longer available on this website.

View this content exclusively through LexisNexis® Here

Not a LexisNexis® Subscriber?

Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via® and Nexis®. This includes content from The National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202594364961

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.