Loughry v. Allstate Ins Company ( 2001 )


Menu:
  •                      UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    __________________
    No. 00-60890
    __________________
    MICHAEL D. LOUGHRY; LAURA L. LOUGHRY,
    Plaintiffs-Appellants,
    v.
    ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, 2415,
    Defendant-Appellee.
    ______________________________________________
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the
    Southern District of Mississippi, Biloxi
    1:99-CV-191-GR
    ______________________________________________
    October 15, 2001
    Before DUHÉ and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges, and RESTANI*, District
    Judge.
    PER CURIAM:**
    Appellants Michael D. Loughry and Laura L. Loughry (the
    “Loughrys”) appeal from an adverse summary judgment dismissing
    their contract and bad faith claims seeking punitive damages
    against Allstate Insurance Company.      After careful review of the
    *
    Judge, U.S. Court of International Trade, sitting by
    designation.
    **
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined
    that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
    except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R.
    47.5.4.
    record, the briefs and oral argument presented upon submission, we
    affirm the    judgment   of   the    district      court   for   the   following
    reasons.
    1.    Even assuming that the water pipe leak could constitute a
    “sudden and accidental escape of water,” the Loughrys failed to
    create a fact issue that such water directly caused the physical
    damage for which they claim damages.                 In the absence of such
    evidence,    the   provisions       of       the   contract   explicitly    and
    unambiguously precluded recovery on the Loughrys' contract claim.
    2.    The Loughrys' claim of estoppel is without merit because,
    under Mississippi law, estoppel and waiver cannot extend insurance
    coverage to cover a risk or loss not contemplated by the language
    of an insurance policy.       See Mississippi Hosp. & Med. Serv. v.
    Lumpkin, 
    229 So. 2d 573
    , 576 (Miss. 1969); Gilley v. Protective Life
    Ins. Co., 
    17 F.3d 775
    , 781 (5th Cir. 1994).            In addition, even were
    estoppel available, the Loughrys failed to establish a fact issue
    with respect to reliance on Allstate's conduct.
    3.    Punitive damages based upon bad faith denial of coverage
    are not available because Allstate was entitled to summary judgment
    on the coverage issue.
    Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 00-60890

Filed Date: 10/16/2001

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021