The insureds' claim for flood coverage filed in state court was properly dismissed by the trial court. Rodriguez-Roble v. Am. Nat'l Prop. & Cas. Co., 2015 La. App LEXIS 1810 (La. Ct. App. Sept. 23, 2015).
The insureds' home was damaged by wind, rain and flood water during Hurricane Isac. The insureds provided to American National what they contended was satisfactory proof of their claim. American National failed to make any offers to resolve the claim.
The insureds sued in state court, seeking damages under the policy and penalties for American National's alleged bad faith in failing to settle or pay the claim. American National moved to dismiss, arguing that the state court did not have subject matter jurisdiction. American National further argued that under the National Flood Insurance Program, the federal courts had exclusive jurisdiction over the denial and adjustment of flood insurance claims. The trial court agreed that the flood insurance policy was governed by federal law.
The appellate court affirmed. Because a flood insurance policy was codified under federal law, an insured was charged with knowledge of a flood insurance policy's contents even if the insured never received a copy of the policy. Federal courts had exclusive jurisdiction over disputes regarding the denial and adjustment of flood claims. Here, the insureds could not avoid the federal courts' original exclusive jurisdiction over their claims based upon their alleged lack of understanding that their policy was part of a "federal program."
