No specific laws identified for this ruling.
The appellate court affirmed summary judgment in favor of the insurance company, holding that the business interruption policy did not cover loss of income resulting from destruction of customer-owned patterns because the patterns themselves were excluded from coverage under the Property Not Covered Endorsement.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.