Queen Anne Park Homeowners Ass'n v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 763 F.3d 1232

Queen Anne Park HOA owns a two-building condominium in Seattle insured by State Farm under a condominium/association policy effective 1992–1998.
The policy generally covered "accidental direct physical loss" and extended coverage to "any accidental direct physical loss to covered property involving collapse," but did not define "collapse" except to exclude "settling, cracking, shrinking, bulging or expansion."
In 2010 the HOA claimed hidden decay caused a "substantial impairment of structural integrity" constituting collapse during the policy periods; State Farm denied coverage, concluding collapse had not occurred within the policy term and asserting exclusions.
The HOA sued in federal court (W.D. Wash.) for declaratory relief and breach of contract; it moved for summary judgment arguing Washington law defines collapse as a "substantial impairment of structural integrity."
The district court denied summary judgment, adopting a standard that would require, in addition to substantial impairment, evidence of an imminent threat of collapse.
The Ninth Circuit found Washington precedent (Sprague v. Safeco) left the meaning of "collapse" unresolved and certified the controlling question to the Washington Supreme Court: what "collapse" means under Washington law when an insurance policy insures "accidental direct physical loss involving collapse" but does not define the term except by exclusions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
What is the meaning of "collapse" under Washington law when undefined in the policy?	Collapse means a "substantial impairment of structural integrity" of any portion or component of the building.	Collapse requires a more restrictive meaning—e.g., actual falling down or at least an imminent threat of falling—so the HOA's loss is not covered.	The Ninth Circuit certified the question to the Washington Supreme Court for authoritative resolution; it did not decide the substantive meaning.

Sprague v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 276 P.3d 1270 (Wash. 2012) (Washington Supreme Court decision that declined to resolve the definition of "collapse" in homeowners policy dispute)
Ocean Winds Council of Co-Owners, Inc. v. Auto-Owner Ins. Co., 565 S.E.2d 306 (S.C. 2002) (court applying a more restrictive "fall-down" notion of collapse)
In re McLinn, 744 F.2d 677 (9th Cir. 1984) (discussing federal courts' use of state certification procedures)
Lehman Bros. v. Schein, 416 U.S. 386 (1974) (Supreme Court endorsing certification to state courts when state law is unsettled)