Jacobson v. Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 4672
| 2d Cir. | 2012Background
- Jacobson built an addition to a home near Catskill Creek and experienced repeated flooding from 2004–2006, culminating in a historic June 2006 flood that damaged land and stairs.
- In 2007 he purchased a Standard Flood Insurance Policy (SFIP) from Metropolitan as a Write-Your-Own (WYO) carrier under the NFIP; terms are governed by FEMA regulations.
- The SFIP requires prompt written notice after a flood and a proof of loss within 60 days, including detailed specifications and repair estimates.
- The SFIP excludes losses caused by flood that is already in progress and losses due to earth movement such as subsidence, even if caused by a flood.
- On June 4, 2007 another flood washed away more land; Jacobson did not report to Metropolitan at that time and only filed a claim in January 2008 after returning from vacation; Metropolitan rejected the claim February 13, 2008 for incomplete proof of loss, and FEMA denied on October 3, 2008 on grounds including prompt notice, prior floods, and land subsidence.
- The district court granted summary judgment for Metropolitan; on appeal, the Second Circuit affirmed, holding strict compliance with SFIP terms is required and that Metropolitan did not repudiate the policy.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether strict adherence to the SFIP proof-of-loss requirement bars recovery. | Jacobson argues the incomplete proof should be excused. | Metropolitan contends strict compliance is required and failure bars recovery. | Strict compliance required; incomplete proof bars recovery. |
| Whether Metropolitan's rejection constitutes repudiation that excuses compliance. | Jacobson claims repudiation excuses proof-of-loss compliance. | Metropolitan did not repudiate; it applied policy terms. | No repudiation; district court ruling upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gowland v. Aetna, Inc., 143 F.3d 951 (5th Cir.1998) (NFIP claims require strict construction; public funds protection)
- Flick v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 205 F.3d 386 (9th Cir.2000) (strict interpretation of SFIP terms in NFIP)
- Studio Frames, Ltd. v. Standard Fire Ins. Co., 369 F.3d 376 (4th Cir.2004) (repudiation discussion in NFIP context)
- Phelps v. FEMA, 785 F.2d 13 (1st Cir.1986) (NFIP policy administration by FEMA; strict terms)
- Fed. Crop Ins. Corp. v. Merrill, 332 U.S. 380 (Supreme Court 1947) (government loan/subsidy context; strict compliance)