The U.S. Court for the Southern District of Mississippi found flood exclusions in a homeowners policy to be unambiguous in Buente v. Allstate Ins. Co., No.1:05 CV 712 LTS JMR, 2006 WL 980784 (S.D. Miss. Apr. 12,, 2006).

 

Elmer and Alexa Buente's home was damaged in August 2005 during Hurricane Katrina. The Buentes claimed that the damage was partially caused by wind-driven rain and partially by rising water. They contended that their homeowners policy's flood exclusions were ambiguous and should not apply.

 

The insureds stated that the water damage to their home was not caused by flood, but by storm surge, a peril not specifically excluded by the policy. Thus, they argued that that all of their water damage should be covered.

Allstate—the Buentes' homeowners insurer—though, argued that the exclusions were clear and enforceable.

 

The court said, “Hurricane Katrina moved tidal waters from the Mississippi Sound on shore and inundated thousands of homes…[s]ince the water that entered and damaged the plaintiffs' home was tidal water, I find that the damage caused by this inundation is excluded from coverage.”

 

The flood exclusions were found to be unambiguous, and the court was not free to change or invalidate such terms, so the insureds' motion for partial summary judgment was denied.