Spong v. Fidelity Nat’l Prop. & Cas. Ins.

by
Plaintiffs filed suit against Fidelity, alleging numerous federal and state law claims after Fidelity denied flood insurance coverage. In this interlocutory appeal, Fidelity sought review of the district court's denial of its motion for summary judgment. In light of binding precedent, the court concluded that plaintiff's state-law causes are not preempted by federal law to the extent that they are insurance procurement claims, but claims that pertain to or arise out of “claims handling” after the policy issued are preempted. The court further concluded that, even though not preempted, certain claims cannot succeed as a matter of law. Accordingly, the denial of Fidelity's motion for summary judgment was erroneous in part and the court remanded for further proceedings. View "Spong v. Fidelity Nat'l Prop. & Cas. Ins." on Justia Law