The insured was a developer of a residential project.  Mid-Continent Cas. Co. v. Siena Home Corp., 2011 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 79132 (M.D. Fla. July 8, 2011).  The homeowners filed suit, alleging their homes had defectively constructed exterior wall assemblies which allowed moisture and water to penetrate. 

   Mid-Continent filed suit for a declaratory judgment to establish there was no occurrence because the damage did not manifest during the policy period.  Considering cross-motions for summary judgment, the court noted the underlying allegations sought property damages resulting from water intrusion caused by alleged negligence in constructing the exterior walls of the homes.  Without pondering whether the construction defects arose from an occurrence,the court held Mid-Continent had a duty to defend.

   The court next considered when the "occurrence" of property damage occurred?  Under Florida law, the "occurrence" and resulting coverage of property damage was the manifestation of the damage.  Manifestation was the time that such damage was discernable and reasonably discoverable, not the time of actual discovery. 

   Consequently, the court granted partial summary judgment to establish the manifestation trigger applied.  Summary judgment was denied, however, with respect to application of the principal to the homeowners' individual houses because there were issues of fact as to when their respective damages were first discoverable.