Cross-motions for summary judgment designed to determine coverage for the Church’s collapse claim were both denied. Bethel Missionary Baptist Church v. S. Must. Church Ins. Co., 2019 U. S. Dist. LEXIS 24705 (W. D. N. C. Feb. 15, 2019).
The Church sought summary judgment on its claim for bad faith, arguing that the insurer denied the claim without knowing North Carolina law on court concurrent causation or partial collapse. The Church claimed that the insurer denied the claim without following up on its initial investigation, without addressing all possible areas of coverage, and without knowing the applicable law. The Church’s motion was denied, however, because it had not met its burden of showing there was no genuine issue as to any material fact as a matter of law.
The Insurer moved for summary judgment on all of the Church’s claims. Apart from the Church’s punitive and treble damages claims, the court found that the Insurer had not met its burden to prevail in its cross motion for summary judgment. The Church had not shown sufficient evidence of the Insurer’s bad faith in investigating and denying the claims to elevate them to a treble damages case. So summary judgment was granted as to these claims. The motion was denied, however, for claims of breach of contract, unfair and deceptive trade practices, unfair claims settlement practices, and bad faith.
