The most recent decision in Legend & # 39 ;s Creek Homeowners Association, Inc. against The Travelers Indemnity Co. of America 2021 WL 308180 (SD Ind. 29 January 2021), is a reminder of all this there is nothing more important in terms of insurance claims than the provision on limitation of suit.
Legend & # 39 ;s Creek was damaged as a result of a storm on May 1, 2016. On July 23, 2018, more than two years after the loss and injury, Legend & # 39 ;s Creek filed a lawsuit against travelers for breach of contract and bad faith . Specifically, Legend & # 39 ;s Creek claimed that it was obligated to replace siding for the entire buildings so that there would be no mismatch.
In April 2020, on behalf of Legend & # 39 ;s Creek, the court ordered the parties to proceed with the assessment. However, the Court noted that allowing the evaluation process did not confirm that the evaluation price would be binding, or that it would in any way affect the travelers' legal defense, which included Legend & # 39 ;s Creek failure to file a timely submission. determined that Travelers owed more than $ 250,000 for additional actual cash value for damages covered. Travelers issued payment and five days later canceled the payment on the check when the court granted Travelers' request for summary judgment on the grounds that Legend & # 39 ;s Creek had not complied with the policy's two-year limitation clause and thus was not entitled to exemption under
Legend & # 39; s Creek moved for reconsideration of the Court's summary judgment, which was based in part on the assessment. The court rejected each of Legend & # 39 ;s Creek's arguments. Specifically, the court found that the outcome of the evaluation process did not change the issue it was asked to reconsider ̵
Any monetary differences, as reflected in the valuation price, were not addressed. if the passengers acted in a way that intended to waive the restriction provision. As such, the Court upheld its decision and reiterated its previous decision to provide the parties with an assessment did not support the assessor's fact – based assessment as binding and that travelers still retained their legal defenses.