Michael Torre v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4902
| 3rd Cir. | 2015Background
- Michael and Geraldine Torre owned a Mantoloking, NJ property insured under an SFIP administered by Liberty for Hurricane Sandy damage.
- Liberty paid $235,751.68 (including debris removal from the house); the Torres sought an additional $15,520 for removing non-owned debris (sand, etc.) from land in front of and behind the house.
- Liberty denied coverage for debris removal from the land, asserting the SFIP does not insure land; Torres sued in state court, Liberty removed to federal court; Torres later dropped their FEMA claim.
- Parties agreed no material facts were in dispute; the sole issue was contractual interpretation of the SFIP’s debris-removal provision concerning the term “insured property.”
- District Court granted Liberty’s motion for summary judgment; Torres appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Torres) | Defendant's Argument (Liberty) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the SFIP’s debris-removal provision covers removal of non-owned debris from the insured parcel of land outside the dwelling | “Insured property” includes the entire parcel listed on the Declarations Page (land plus structures) | “Insured property” means only items specifically insured under the SFIP (buildings and covered contents); land is expressly excluded | Court held “insured property” means property insured under the SFIP; land is not insured, so debris removal from land is not covered |
| Whether the word “property” should be given its ordinary meaning to include land | Argues ordinary meaning of property includes land, so the Declarations Page location is the insured property | SFIP distinguishes “described location” (on Declarations Page) from “insured property,” and Article IV expressly excludes land from coverage | Court rejected Torres’ argument based on SFIP’s textual distinctions and exclusions |
| Whether the debris-removal clause must be read to cover land because it appears outside Coverage A (buildings) | If limited to buildings, clause would be redundant with Coverage A clean-up provisions | SFIP is organized by coverage type; debris removal is an “other coverage” distinct from Coverage A clean-up; clause can cover debris on insured items or contents | Court agreed with Liberty that organization and other provisions support limiting coverage to insured property (buildings/contents) |
| Whether policy purpose (protecting real property) requires coverage of land debris removal | Torres cites NFIA purpose to protect real property including land | SFIP long expressly excludes land; no conflict shown between SFIP and statute; textual policy controls | Court held statutory purpose does not override SFIP’s express exclusions; land not covered |
Key Cases Cited
- Suopys v. Omaha Prop. & Cas., 404 F.3d 805 (3d Cir. 2005) (federal common law governs SFIP interpretation)
- Linder & Assocs. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 166 F.3d 547 (3d Cir. 1999) (use standard insurance principles; construe SFIP by plain meaning; ambiguities favor insured)
- C.E.R. 1988, Inc. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 386 F.3d 263 (3d Cir. 2004) (private insurers administer NFIP; government pays claims)
- Dickson v. Am. Bankers Ins. Co. of Fla., 739 F.3d 397 (8th Cir. 2014) (contrasting authority that briefly concluded debris-removal could cover land but not persuasive to this court)