Damage to the YMCA recreation center was not covered due to application of the earth movement exclusion. YMCA of Pueblo v. Secura Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. Lexis 15249 (D. Colo. Feb. 6, 2015). 

   On October 11, 2013, the insureds discovered a leaking water line in the men's shower, where one of

   Where the building was damaged by both a covered cause and a non-covered cause, the policy's anti-concurrent/anti-sequential causation clause barred coverage for a collapsed building. Ashrit Realty LLC v. Tower Nat'l Ins. Co., 2015 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 107 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Jan. 20, 2015).

   The property sustained moderate damage

   Disagreeing with the excess carrier's interpretation of the primary policy, the court determined the commercial property policy was a blanket policy, thereby invoking additional excess coverage. Landmark Am. Ins. Co. v. Pin-Pon Corp., 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 189 (Fla. Ct. App. Jan. 7, 2015).

   The insured purchased a hotel. Renovations were planned