ROCKLAND FUNDING L.L.C., D/B/A WESTBROOK PARTNERS
v.
ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The presence of COVID-19 virus on property does not constitute direct physical loss or damage triggering coverage under an insurance policy, and such loss is further excluded by the policy's contaminant exclusion.
[1] Under New York law, the term 'physical damage' in an insurance policy requires a material physical alteration to property that is perceptible, and the presence of a virus…
[2] An insurance policy exclusion for damage caused by contaminants, including viruses, bars coverage for losses resulting from the presence of a virus on the insured's prope…
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“'[d]irect physical loss' thus requires more than loss of use; it requires an actual, complete dispossession”
Citing Consol. Rest. Operations, Inc. v. Westport Ins. Corp., 235 N.E.3d 332, 342 (N.Y. 2024)
Rockland Funding sought insurance coverage for damages allegedly caused by the presence of COVID-19 virus on its property under a policy issued by Ace…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Direct Physical Loss Or Damage cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the final judgment which denied an insurance claim for damages, determining based on New York law that the presence of the COVID-19 virus on appellant’s property did not constitute direct physical loss or damage so as to trigger coverage under the insurance policy with appellee. See Consol. Rest. Operations, Inc. v. Westport Ins. Corp., 235 N.E. 3d 332, 342 (N.Y. 2024) (holding that the term “physical damage” within an insurance policy “must be understood to require a material physical alteration to the property—one that is perceptible, even if not visible to the naked eye,” and the presence of COVID on the properties did not constitute “physical damage;” further holding that “‘[d]irect physical loss’ thus requires more than loss of use; it requires an actual, complete dispossession”). In addition, the policy also contained an exclusion for damage caused by contaminants, which specifically included damage caused by a virus. See Northwell Health, Inc. v. Lexington Ins. Co., 550 F. Supp. 3d 108, 121 (S.D.N.Y. 2021).
Affirmed.
KLINGENSMITH, C.J., WARNER and FORST, JJ., concur.
* * *
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
2