Following Superstorm Sandy, many state insurance departments along the East Coast issued bulletins indicating that insurance companies should not impose hurricane deductibles on homeowners, mainly because the classification of Sandy shifted from a hurricane to a post-tropical storm as it traveled the East Coast.
The New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) has extended the emergency regulation (15th Amendment to Regulation 64 (11 NYCRR 216) surrounding mediations relating to Hurricane Sandy.
As Superstorm Sandy insurance claims wend their way through the courts, we are beginning to see decisions related to motions on the pleadings, especially with regard to extracontractual claims.
OK – here’s a dilemma. You have a federal program that doles out millions to people that take on risky behavior, and in fact can be seen as rewarding that risky behavior at taxpayer’s expense. So Congress passes a law in 2012 with overwhelming bipartisan support, and requires that the government quit subsidizing people that build in flood prone areas, especially if they are receiving much more than they are paying into the system.
In a series of recent sua sponte decisions in six Superstorm Sandy cases, Judges Seybert and Feuerstein dismissed extra contractual claims and dismissed all but the first named plaintiffs’ claims pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 20.