State Farm hired Herb Goff, a forensic engineer with a degree in engineering from the University of Kentucky, to inspect the RV and determine the source of the damage. Ultimately, Mr. Goff concluded that the damage had resulted from a leak in the cold-water supply line in the RV. According to Mr. Goff, this supply line had suffered wear and tear and had slowly leaked water over a period of months or years, causing damp conditions to exist that resulted in the mold and fungal growth found in the RV.

State Farm denied the Blankenships' claim, and they sued.

The insurer moved for summary judgment.

The District Court's Decision

The district court granted State Farm's motion.

In its decision, the district court explained that, according to the Blankenships, the RV had never been involved in a collision or damaged by falling debris. The district court pointed out that the only expert whose opinion was in the record had determined that a water line in the Blankenships' RV had failed due to wear and tear, which resulted in a slow but persistent leak over the course of months or longer and that the RV not only had sustained water damage but as a result of the wet conditions had become "infested with black mold and mushrooms."

The district court then ruled that the circumstances surrounding the leak in the Blankenships' RV did not constitute an "accident" covered by the State Farm insurance policy. Among other things, the district court noted that the leak was not a "chance event" completely beyond the control of the Blankenships as contemplated in the State Farm policy given that if either of them had "regularly checked inside the RV, the leak could have been repaired before causing such extensive damage."

Moreover, the district court added, this was not a scenario where the event was "direct" or "sudden" but, rather, the damage had "occurred slowly, over an extended period of time." Most likely, the district court continued, the leak was the result of normal wear and tear, which was expressly excluded from coverage under the policy.

The district court concluded that because the policy excluded coverage for loss due to the growth of fungi whether or not the fungi resulted from a loss caused by "direct, sudden, and accidental damage," the Blankenships also could not recover for the resultant damage to the structure of the RV caused by the mushroom and mold growth.

The case is Blankenship v. State Farm Mutual and Automobile Ins. Co., No. 6:18-cv-00241-GFVT-EBA (E.D. Ky. Oct. 31, 2019).