### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

W I L L I A M B A Y L E ; D A R L E N E B A Y L E

P l a i n t i f f s

- A p p e l l a n t s

v

.

A L L S T A T E I N S U R A N C E C O M P A N Y

D e f e n d a n t

- A p p e l l e e

A p p e a l f

r o m t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t

f o r t h e E a s t e r n D i s t r i c t o f L o u i s i a n a

B e f o r e D A V I S

, W I E N E R

, a n d S O U T H W I C K

, C i r c u i t J u d g e s

.

W I E N E R

, C i r c u i t J u d g e :

I n t h i s a p p e a l

, w e a r e c a l l e d o n t o a d d r e s s o n e o f t h e r e c u r r i n g q u e s t i o n s

e n c o u n t e r e d i n h u r r i c a n e

- r e l a t e d p r o p e r t y i n s u r a n c e d i s p u t e s t h a t a r e g o v e r n e d

b y L o u i s i a n a l a w : W h e n t h e i n s u r e d a n d t h e i n s u r e r a g r e e t h a t b o t h a c o v e r e d

r i s k a n d a n o n

- c o v e r e d o r e x c l u d e d r i s k c a u s e d s o m e o f t h e d a m a g e i n c u r r e d b y

t h e i n s u r e d p r o p e r t y

, w h i c h p a r t y m u s t b e a r t h e b u r d e n o f i d e n t i f y i n g t h e

d i s c r e t e i t e m o r i t e m s o f p r o p e r t y t h a t w e r e d a m a g e d a n d p r o v i n g w h a t p o r t i o n

o f t h e d a m a g e w a s c a u s e d b y t h e n o n

- c o v e r e d o r e x c l u d e d r i s k ? H e r e

, s i b l i n g s U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t



### F I L E D

August 11, 20 10

Lyle W . Cayce

Clerk Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

W i l l i a m a n d D a r l e n e B a y l e s u e d D e f e n d a n t

- A p p e l l a n t A l l s t a t e I n s u r a n c e 1

C o m p a n y ( “ A l l s t a t e ” )

, w h i c h h a d i s s u e d t h e B a y l e s ’ h o m e o w n e r s p o l i c y

. T h e y

a l l e g e d t h a t ( 1 ) A l l s t a t e f a i l e d t o i n d e m n i f y t h e m a d e q u a t e l y f o r w i n d

- c a u s e d

,

s t r u c t u r a l d a m a g e t o t h e i r p r o p e r t y

, a n d ( 2 ) A l l s t a t e w r o n g l y e m p l o y e d t h e 2

“ a c t u a l c a s h v a l u e ” ( “ A C V ” ) o f t h e p r o p e r t y r a t h e r t h a n t h e “ b u i l d i n g s t r u c t u r e

r e i m b u r s e m e n t ” s t a n d a r d t o c a l c u l a t e t h e d o l l a r a m o u n t o f s t r u c t u r a l d a m a g e

c a u s e d b y w i n d

. T h e B a y l e s a l s o c l a i m s t a t u t o r y p e n a l t i e s a g a i n s t A l l s t a t e

,

a l l e g i n g t h a t i t a r b i t r a r i l y a n d c a p r i c i o u s l y r e f u s e d t o p a y t h e i r w i n d d a m a g e

c l a i m s t i m e l y

. T h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t g r a n t e d A l l s t a t e ’ s m o t i o n f o r s u m m a r y 3

j u d g m e n t a n d d i s m i s s e d t h e B a y l e s ’ a c t i o n

. W e a f f i r m

. 4

I

. F a c t s & P r o c e e d i n g s

A

. B a c k g r o u n d

H u r r i c a n e K a t r i n a c a u s e d c o n s i d e r a b l e d a m a g e t o t h e B a y l e s ’ p r o p e r t y i n

C h a l m e t t e

, L o u i s i a n a

. M s

. B a y l e e v a c u a t e d b e f o r e t h e s t o r m

, a n d n o o n e w a s

p r e s e n t i n t h e h o u s e w h e n e i g h t t o t e n f e e t o f w a t e r ( m i x e d w i t h e s c a p e d o i l f r o m

a n e a r b y M u r p h y O i l s t o r a g e t a n k ) f l o o d e d t h e B a y l e s ’ o n e

- s t o r y h o u s e

. T h e

d a m a g e t o t h e h o u s e a n d a s t o r a g e s h e d w a s

, b y a l l a c c o u n t s

, e x t e n s i v e

,

On ly Da rle n e Bayle occ upie d the ins ured s sin gle-f ami ly, sin gle-s tor y res ide nce at 1

iss ue here

.

In th e d ist ric t cour t, the Bayles also cha llenged the amo unt that they reco vered for 2

dam age to cont ents and “ad dit ional living expe nse s” (“ ALE”) in the dis tri ct cour t, but they

app ear to have wa ived enti rely thei r cont ents and ALE clai ms on ap pea l.

L A

. R E V

. S T A T

. A N N

. §§ 22:1 220 & 22:6 58, red es ignate d §§ 22:1 973 & 1 8 9 3 b y A cts 3

2008, N o. 415, §1

, eff

. Jan. 1, 200 9.

.

The dis tri ct cour t had als o grant ed Alls tat e’s mo tio n to exclud e a sup ple me ntal expe rt 4

rep ort by the Bayles ’ expe rt. The Bayles do not app e a l t h e e x c l u s ion of thei r sup ple me ntal

expe rt rep ort

.

2 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

a l t h o u g h t h e r e c o r d r e v e a l s t h a t l i t t l e o f t h e d a m a g e a p p e a r s t o h a v e b e e n

c a u s e d b y w i n d

. M s

. B a y l e t e s t i f i e d t h a t

, w h e n s h e r e t u r n e d t o v i e w t h e 5

w r e c k a g e

, s h e s a w j u s t o n e c r a c k e d w i n d o w p a n e i n o n e o f t h e b e d r o o m s a n d

t h a t s h e w a s n o t a b l e t o l o o k i n t h e a t t i c f o r r o o f d a m a g e

. I n h i s d e p o s i t i o n

t e s t i m o n y

, M r

. B a y l e n o t e d t h a t

, w h e n h e v i e w e d t h e d a m a g e i n N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 5

,

h e s a w o n e o r p e r h a p s t w o s m a l l w i n d o w p a n e s t h a t w e r e b r o k e n

, b u t c o n c e d e d

t h a t t h e s e c o u l d h a v e b e e n d a m a g e d b y v a n d a l s

. N e i t h e r o f t h e B a y l e s w a s a b l e

t o i d e n t i f

y o r s p e c i f

y a n y s t r u c t u r a l d a m a g e t h a t h a d g o n e u n c o m p e n s a t e d o r

,

f o r t h a t m a t t e r

, a n y i t e m s d a m a g e d b y w i n d w h o s e r e p a i r c o s t s e x c e e d e d t h e

a m o u n t p a i d b y A l l s t a t e ; t h e B a y l e s ’ e x p e r t ’ s r e p o r t w a s s i l e n t o n b o t h i s s u e s

.

I n O c t o b e r 2 0 0 5

, t h e f i r s t c l a i m s a d j u s t e r w a s s e n t b y A l l s t a t e t o i n s p e c t

t h e B a y l e s ’ p r o p e r t y

. H e n o t e d t h a t t h e w a t e r l i n e o n t h e e x t e r i o r o f t h e h o u s e

w a s t e n f e e t a b o v e g r a d e l e v e l a n d t h a t a n i n t e r i o r w a t e r l i n e w a s e i g h t f e e t

a b o v e f l o o r l e v e l

. H e o b s e r v e d s e v e r e d a m a g e t o t h e i n t e r i o r a n d t o t h e c o n t e n t s

o f t h e h o u s e

, a l l o f w h i c h h e a t t r i b u t e d t o f l o o d

. H e a d d e d t h a t n o c o n t e n t s c o u l d

h a v e b e e n s a l v a g e d

. S u b s e q u e n t a d j u s t e r s f o r A l l s t a t e i n s p e c t e d t h e r o o f a n d

f o u n d a n u m b e r o f s h i n g l e s m i s s i n g a n d s o m e d a m a g e t o t h e g u t t e r s

, b u t s a w n o

s u b s t a n t i a l s t r u c t u r a l d a m a g e

. T h e y a l s o r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e s t o r a g e s h e d h a d l o s t

a s i d e w i n d o w t o w i n d a n d t h a t s o m e i t e m s i n s i d e t h e s h e d a p p e a r e d t o h a v e

b e e n e x p o s e d t o r a i n w a t e r b e f o r e t h e f

l o o d w a t e r a r r i v e d

.

Ar onso n v

. State Farm Fi re and Casu al ty Co.

, 969 So. 2d 671, 675 ( La. App

. 4th Cir. 5

2007) (exp lainin g that evide nce of a “ w i n d

- c r eate d ope ning and the pas sage of rain thr ough

thos e ope nings into the dam aged pr ope rty are cond itio ns pr ece dent to rec overy” and that “[ i]n

ord er to sati sf

y the afor em enti oned c ondi tion s, t he ins ured ne ed not es tabl ish t hat the w ind

act ually cre ated a hole in the st r u c t u r e

, b u t ins tead mus t only dem ons tra te that the dir ect

for ce of the wi nd cre ated an ope ning in the build ing t h r o ugh wh ich wa ter ente red .” ) (c itin g

C O U C H O N I N S U R A N C E § 1 53:1 7 ( 3d ed. 200 6))

.

3 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 3 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

A t t h e t i m e o f t h e h u r r i c a n e

, t h e B a y l e s ’ p r o p e r t y w a s i n s u r e d u n d e r a n

A l l s t a t e h o m e o w n e r s p o l i c y t h a t c o v e r e d w i n d d a m a g e a n d u n d e r a s e p a r a t e

,

N a t i o n a l F l o o d I n s u r a n c e P o l i c y ( “ N F I P ” ) t h a t c o v e r e d f l o o d d a m a g e

. A s t h e

a d m i n i s t r a t o r o f

t h e f e d e r a l f l o o d p o l i c y

, A l l s t a t e p a i d t h e B a y l e s t h e f u l l p o l i c y

l i m i t s o f $ 7 5

, 0 0 0 f

o r s t r u c t u r a l d a m a g e a n d $ 3 0

, 0 0 0 f o r c o n t e n t s

, f

o r a t o t a l o f

$ 1 0 5

, 0 0 0 i n f

l o o d d a m a g e

. U n d e r i t s h o m e o w n e r s p o l i c y

, A l l s t a t e p a i d t h e B a y l e s

$ 3

, 6 2 8

. 8 7 f

o r s t r u c t u r a l d a m a g e t o t h e r o o f

, $ 8

, 8 0 4

. 2 2 f o r p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y

, a n d

$ 5

, 1 2 7

. 6 4 i n a d d i t i o n a l l i v i n g e x p e n s e s ( “ A L E ” )

, f o r a t o t a l o f $ 1 7

, 5 6 0

. 7 3 i n w i n d

d a m a g e

.

T h e o v e r a l l d a m a g e t o t h e h o u s e w a s s u f f i c i e n t l y s e v e r e t h a t t h e B a y l e s

e l e c t e d n o t t o r e p a i r i t ; i n s t e a d

, t h e y “ s o l d ” i t a n d t h e l o t f o r $ 6 4

, 0 0 0

, u n r e p a i r e d

,

t o M u r p h y O i l i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e s e t t l e m e n t o f t h e i r p e t r o l e u m s p i l l c l a i m

.

T h e r e m n a n t s o f t h e h o u s e w e r e s u b s e q u e n t l y d e m o l i s h e d

. T h e r e c o r d d o e s n o t

r e f l e c t t h a t e i t h e r o f t h e B a y l e s o b j e c t e d t o o r o t h e r w i s e c o n t e s t e d A l l s t a t e ’ s

a d j u s t m e n t o f

t h e i r c l a i m b e f

o r e t h e y f

i l e d s u i t i n A u g u s t 2 0 0 7

. I n d o i n g s o

, t h e

B a y l e s j o i n e d t w e n t y

- e i g h t o t h e r s t a t e c o u r t p l a i n t i f f s

.

B

. D i s t r i c t C o u r t P r o c e e d i n g s

I n F e b r u a r y 2 0 0 8

, f

o l l o w i n g r e m o v a l f

r o m s t a t e c o u r t

, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t

o r d e r e d t h e c a s e s s e v e r e d

, a n d t h e B a y l e s f i l e d t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l c o m p l a i n t t h e

n e x t m o n t h

. I n N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 8

, A l l s t a t e f i l e d a m o t i o n f

o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t

s e e k i n g d i s m i s s a l o f t h e B a y l e s ’ a c t i o n

.

T h e B a y l e s ’ h o m e o w n e r s p o l i c y p r o v i d e s t h a t

, i f t h e i n s u r e d s d o n o t r e p a i r

t h e i r d a m a g e d p r o p e r t y

, p a y m e n t u n d e r t h e p o l i c y “ w i l l b e o n a n a c t u a l c a s h

v a l u e b a s i s

. ” I n s u p p o r t o f i t s m o t i o n f o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t

, A l l s t a t e o f f e r e d

t h r e e e x p e r t

- w i t n e s s r e p o r t s t o s u b s t a n t i a t e t h e A C V o f t h e B a y l e s ’ p r o p e r t y a n d

4 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 4 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

t o j u s t i f y t h e s u m s t h a t A l l s t a t e h a d a l r e a d y p a i d t h e m u n d e r i t s p o l i c y ’ s w i n d

c o v e r a g e

. A l l s t a t e ’ s f i r s t e x p e r t r e p o r t

, p r e p a r e d b y T i m o t h y O ’ B r i e n i n

N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 8

, o f

f e r e d a “ d r i v e

- b y ” m a r k e t

- v a l u e a p p r a i s a l o f t h e t h e n

- v a c a n t

l o t

, a n d d e t e r m i n e d i t s A C V t o b e $ 1 0

, 0 0 0

.

A l l s t a t e o f

f e r e d a s e c o n d e x p e r t r e p o r t b y a n e n g i n e e r i n g a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n

f i r m

, O ’ K e e d a C o m p a n y

, L L C ( “ O ’ K e e d a ” )

, w h i c h r e v i e w e d t h e d a m a g e t o t h e

h o u s e r e l a t i v e t o t h e p a y m e n t s m a d e u n d e r t h e f l o o d a n d w i n d p o l i c i e s

. O ’ K e e d a

t o o p e r f

o r m e d i t s r e v i e w i n N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 8

, b a s i n g i t o n p h o t o g r a p h s

,

v i d e o t a p e

, a d j u s t e r s ’ r e p o r t s

, a n d t h e B a y l e s ’ d e p o s i t i o n t e s t i m o n y

. T h e O ’ K e e d a

r e p o r t s t a t e d t h a t t h e r o o f o f t h e h o u s e w a s “ c o m p l e t e l y u n s c a t h e d

, ” w i t h t h e

e x c e p t i o n o f s o m e m i s s i n g s h i n g l e s

, a n d c o n c l u d e d t h a t a d e q u a t e c o m p e n s a t i o n

h a d b e e n p a i d f

o r a l l d a m a g e c a u s e d b y w i n d

. I n a s u p p l e m e n t a l r e p o r t

, a g a i n

f r o m N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 8

, O ’ K e e d a c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e A C V o f t h e d a m a g e i n c u r r e d

b y t h e B a y l e s ’ p r o p e r t y t o t a l e d $ 1 0 8

, 2 2 0

. 0 0

. A l l s t a t e ’ s e a r l i e r A C V e s t i m a t e o f

t h e h o u s e

, a s d e t a i l e d i n i t s N F I P F i n a l R e p o r t a n d d a t e d O c t o b e r 2 5

, 2 0 0 5

, h a d

s t a t e d t h a t t h e A C V o f t h e h o u s e w a s $ 7 4

, 2 8 4

. 8 0

.

I n o p p o s i n g A l l s t a t e ’ s m o t i o n f o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t

, t h e B a y l e s ’ o n l y

s u b m i s s i o n w a s a r e p o r t p r e p a r e d b y S t e v e n H i t c h c o c k

, a c l a i m s a d j u s t e r w h o

e s t i m a t e d t h e t o t a l c o s t o f r e p a i r i n g a n d r e p l a c i n g t h e h o u s e

. H e b a s e d h i s

c o n c l u s i o n s o n i n t e r v i e w s w i t h t h e B a y l e s a n d c o m p u t e r s o f t w a r e u s e d t o

e s t i m a t e i n s u r a n c e

, r e s t o r a t i o n

, a n d r e m o d e l i n g c o s t s

. A f t e r o f f e r i n g a l i n e

- i t e m

l i s t i n g o f t h e m a t e r i a l s a n d l a b o r n e e d e d t o r e s t o r e t h e e n t i r e p r o p e r t y

,

i r r e s p e c t i v e o f w h e t h e r t h e c a u s e o f t h e d a m a g e w a s w i n d o r f l o o d

, o r a

c o m b i n a t i o n o f

b o t h

, H i t c h c o c k c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e t o t a l r e p l a c e m e n t c o s t v a l u e

( “ R C V ” ) o f t h e B a y l e s ’ h o u s e w a s $ 1 8 2

, 8 6 3

. 1 3

. H e v e n t u r e d n o A C V

.

5 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 5 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

T h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t g r a n t e d A l l s t a t e ’ s m o t i o n f o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t

,

d i s m i s s i n g t h e B a y l e s ’ a c t i o n

. R e l e v a n t t o t h i s a p p e a l

, t h e c o u r t h e l d t h a t ( 1 ) 6

L o u i s i a n a l a w p l a c e s t h e b u r d e n o f s e g r e g a t i n g c o v e r e d a n d n o n

- c o v e r e d l o s s e s

o n t h e i n s u r e d

, ( 2 ) a s t h e B a y l e s h a d f a i l e d t o p o i n t t o a n y w i n d d a m a g e d i t e m s

f o r w h i c h A l l s t a t e h a d n o t a l r e a d y c o m p e n s a t e d t h e m

, t h e y w e r e n o t e n t i t l e d t o

a n y a d d i t i o n a l c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r s t r u c t u r a l d a m a g e f r o m w i n d ; ( 3 ) A C V

, n o t

R C V

, w a s t h e p r o p e r v a l u a t i o n s t a n d a r d f o r c a l c u l a t i n g t h e q u a n t u m o f d a m a g e s

i n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r c l a i m s p r o c e s s

, s o t h e B a y l e s w e r e n o t e n t i t l e d t o s t a t u t o r y

p e n a l t i e s ; a n d ( 4 ) t h e B a y l e s h a d a d d u c e d n o c o m p e t e n t e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t

t h e i r a s s e r t i o n t h a t A l l s t a t e h a d m i s h a n d l e d t h e i r c l a i m s

. T h e B a y l e s t i m e l y 7

f i l e d t h e i r n o t i c e o f a p p e a l

.

I I

. A N A L Y S I S

A

. A p p l i c a b l e L a w & S t a n d a r d o f R e v i e w

W h e n

, a s h e r e

, j u r i s d i c t i o n i s b a s e d o n d i v e r s i t y

, w e a p p l y t h e f o r u m

s t a t e ’ s s u b s t a n t i v e l a w

. T h e p a r t i e s a g r e e t h a t L o u i s i a n a l a w a p p l i e s

. 8

W e r e v i e w a d i s t r i c t c o u r t ’ s g r a n t o f s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t d e n o v o

.

S u m m a r y j u d g m e n t s h o u l d b e g r a n t e d o n l y i f t h e r e i s n o g e n u i n e i s s u e o f

m a t e r i a l f a c t

. A f a c t i s m a t e r i a l o n l y i f i t s r e s o l u t i o n w o u l d a f f e c t t h e o u t c o m e 9

T he dis tri ct cour t als o grant ed Alls tat e’s mo tio n to exclud e a sup ple me ntal expe rt 6

rep ort by Hi tch coc k, wh ich add res se d the iss ue of “s egregat ing” cover ed fr om non- cover ed

los se s, find ing it untim ely and pr ejudi cial to the def enda nt. The Bayles have wa ived this iss ue

on app eal, s o w e d o n ot add res s it.

Bayl e v. Al ls tate Insur. Co.

, No. 08-1 319, 2008 WL 5054572

, at *2 (E. D. La., Nov. 21, 7

2008)

.

Eri e R.R

. v. T om pki ns

, 304 U. S. 64 (193 8). 8

Wee ks Ma ri ne Inc. v. Fi rem an' s Fund Ins

. Co.

, 340 F.3d 233

, 235 (5t h Cir

. 2003)

. 9

6 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 6 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

o f t h e a c t i o n

, a n d a n i s s u e i s g e n u i n e o n l y “ i f t h e e v i d e n c e i s s u f f i c i e n t f o r a

r e a s o n a b l e j u r y t o r e t u r n a v e r d i c t f o r t h e n o n m o v i n g p a r t y

. ” “ I f t h e b u r d e n a t 1 0

t r i a l r e s t s o n t h e n o n

- m o v a n t

, t h e m o v a n t m u s t m e r e l y d e m o n s t r a t e a n a b s e n c e

o f e v i d e n t i a r y s u p p o r t i n t h e r e c o r d f o r t h e n o n

- m o v a n t ’ s c a s e

. ” O n c e a p a r t y 1 1

m e e t s t h e i n i t i a l b u r d e n o f d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s n o g e n u i n e i s s u e o f

m a t e r i a l f a c t f

o r t r i a l

, t h e b u r d e n s h i f t s t o t h e n o n

- m o v a n t t o p r o d u c e e v i d e n c e

o f t h e e x i s t e n c e o f s u c h a n i s s u e f o r t r i a l

. T h e n o n

- m o v a n t m u s t g o b e y o n d t h e

1 2

p l e a d i n g s a n d p r e s e n t s p e c i f i c f a c t s i n d i c a t i n g a g e n u i n e i s s u e f o r t r i a l

. O n

1 3

a p p e a l w e m a y a f

f i r m a g r a n t o f s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t “ o n a n y l e g a l g r o u n d r a i s e d

b e l o w

, e v e n i f i t w a s n o t t h e b a s i s f o r t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ' s d e c i s i o n

. ” 1 4

B

. B u r d e n s o f P r o o f & B u r d e n s o f P r o d u c t i o n

T h e p a r t i e s v o c i f

e r o u s l y d i s a g r e e w h e t h e r i t i s t h e i n s u r e r o r t h e i n s u r e d

w h o m u s t b e a r t h e b u r d e n o f p r o v i n g t h a t t h e d a m a g e f o r w h i c h r e c o v e r y i s

s o u g h t w a s c a u s e d b y a n i n s u r e d r i s k ( w i n d ) o r b y a n n o n

- i n s u r e d o r e x c l u d e d

r i s k ( f l o o d ) w h e n

, a s h e r e

, b o t h w i n d a n d f l o o d c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e o v e r a l l d a m a g e

i n c u r r e d b y t h e p r o p e r t y

. N e i t h e r p a r t y c o n t e n d s t h a t a n y a p p l i c a b l e p r o v i s i o n 1 5

Ha mi lton v. Segue Softw ar e, Inc.

, 232 F.3d 473, 477 (5t h Cir. 2000) (c itin g Ande rso n 1 0

v. Li ber ty Lob by, Inc.

, 477 U. S. 242

, 248 (198 6))

.

Mi ss. Ri ve r Basi c Al li anc e v. W estp hal

, 230 F.3d 170

, 174 (5t h Cir

. 2000)

. 1 1

Cel otex Corp

. v. Ca trett

, 106 S. Ct

. 2548, 255 2 ( 1986)

. 1 2

Pia zz a' s Seaf

ood Wor ld, LLC v. O dom

, 448 F.3d 744

, 752 (5t h Cir

. 2006)

. 1 3

Perf orm anc e Autop le x II Ltd. v. Mi d-Con tinen t Cas. Co.

, 322 F.3d 847, 853 (5t h Cir. 1 4

2003) ( cit ing In re W

il li am s

, 298 F.3d 458

, 462 & n. 5 ( 5th Cir. 200 2))

.

The Bay l e s a l s o ass ert in the alte rnat ive that fed eral law requ ires the ins urer to 1 5

“s egregat e” or “all ocat e” dam age. The Bayles poi nt to fed eral law governi ng pr ivate ins urer s

wh o adm inis ter fed eral flo od ins uranc e pol icie s, and cont end that par tic ular pr ovis io n s re q u ir e

7 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 7 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

o f t h e A l l s t a t e p o l i c y i s a m b i g u o u s

, a n d t h e B a y l e s d o n o t s e e k

— a s h a v e

i n s u r e d s i n o t h e r c a s e s

— a d d i t i o n a l b e n e f i t s u n d e r a n a m e d p e r i l p o l i c y o r u n d e r

a p o l i c y t h a t c o n t a i n s a n a n t i

- c o n c u r r e n t c a u s e p r o v i s i o n

. A n d

, u n l i k e m a n y 1 6

h u r r i c a n e

- d a m a g e d p r o p e r t i e s

, t h e B a y l e s ’ h o u s e w a s n o t r e d u c e d t o i t s

f o u n d a t i o n s o r t o b u t a s l a b

. A s f r a m e d b y t h e p a r t i e s

, t h e i s s u e i s s i m p l y

w h e t h e r A l l s t a t e h a s t h e b u r d e n o f p r o v i n g t h a t a l l u n c o m p e n s a t e d d a m a g e w a s

c a u s e d b y f

l o o d a n d t h u s n o t c o v e r e d b y i t s p o l i c y ’ s w i n d p r o v i s i o n

, o r w h e t h e r

, 1 7

i n s t e a d

, A l l s t a t e m a y b e g r a n t e d s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t m e r e l y b y p o i n t i n g o u t t h e

B a y l e s ’ f a i l u r e t o p r o f f e r s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t t h e i r c l a i m t h a t w i n d

,

r a t h e r t h a n f

l o o d

, c a u s e d t h e i r u n c o m p e n s a t e d ( o r u n d e r

- c o m p e n s a t e d ) d a m a g e

.

T h e B a y l e s r e l y o n l a n g u a g e f r o m o u r r e c e n t d e c i s i o n i n D i c k e r s o n v

.

L e x i n g t o n I

n s u r a n c e C o m p a n y i n a s s e r t i n g t h a t

, b e c a u s e b o t h s i d e s a g r e e t h a t 1 8

s o m e d a m a g e w a s c a u s e d b y w i n d

, t h e b u r d e n s h i f t s t o A l l s t a t e t o p u t f o r w a r d

e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e a d d i t i o n a l c o m p e n s a t i o n s o u g h t f o r w i n d

- c a u s e d d a m a g e i n

f a c t r e l a t e s t o f

l o o d

- c a u s e d d a m a g e

. A l l s t a t e c o u n t e r s w i t h t w o a l t e r n a t i v e

suc h pr ivate ins urer s to adjus t both flo od and wi nd clai ms sim ultan eous ly. The Bayles fai l to

tak e into acc ount tha t no fed eral “s ingle adjus ter ” pr ogram wa s ever cre ated

. 34 C.F. R. §

63.2 3(i )( 1). As the Bayles cit e no autho rit y to sup por t the pr opo sit ion that this fed eral pr ogram

wa s inte n d e d to dis plac e st ate law governi ng the burd ens of pr oof and pr oduc tio n in brea ch

of ins uranc e c ontr act c laim s, w e d o n ot add res s this c onte ntio n.

For our dis cus sio n and analys is par sin g the rela tive ev ide ntiar y burd ens in the 1 6

pr es ence of

t hos e t ypes of

in sur ance c ontr act s, see

, e. g., G ri ll etta v. Le xin gton Ins. Co.

558 F.3d 359 (5 t h C i r

, 2 0 0 9 ) ; Brous sa rd v. State Farm Fir e and Cas. Co.

, 523 F.3d 618 (5t h

Cir. 2008); Tuep ker v. State Far m Fir e & Casua lty Co.

, 507 F.3d 346, 350- 53 (5t h Cir. 2007) ;

Leona rd v. N

atio nw ide M

ut. Ins. Co.

, 499 F.3d 419

, 423 (5t h Cir

. 2007)

.

This ass ume s, of cour se

, that the ins ured s are or wo uld be able to ide ntif y any 1 7

uncom pens ated d ama ge.

556 F. 3d 290, 294 -95 (5t h Cir

. 2009)

. 1 8

8 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 8 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f D i c k e r s o n

. I t f i r s t c o n t e n d s t h a t D i c k e r s o n d i d n o t c h a n g e t h e

“ b u r d e n

- s h i f

t i n g ” r u l e a r t i c u l a t e d b y t h e L o u i s i a n a S u p r e m e C o u r t i n Jo n e s v

.

E s t a t e o f S a n t i a g o

, o n w h i c h D i c k e r s o n e x p r e s s l y r e l i e d

. A l t e r n a t i v e l y

, A l l s t a t e 1 9

i n s i s t s t h a t o u r s t a t e m e n t i n D i c k e r s o n r e g a r d i n g t h e a l l o c a t i o n o f t h e b u r d e n s

o f p r o o f u n d e r L o u i s i a n a l a w w a s d i c t u m

. W e c o n s i d e r t h e s e c o n t e n t i o n s i n 2 0

t u r n

.

1

. D i c k e r s o n & J o n e s

W h e n w e a p p l y s t a t e l a w

, w e “ a r e b o u n d t o a p p l y t h e l a w a s i n t e r p r e t e d

b y t h e s t a t e ’ s h i g h e s t c o u r t

. ” “ I f d a m a g e t o i m m o v e a b l e p r o p e r t y i s c o v e r e d

, i n 2 1

w h o l e o r i n p a r t

, u n d e r t h e t e r m s o f t h e p o l i c y o f t h e i n s u r a n c e

, t h e b u r d e n i s o n

870 S o.2 d 1002, 101 0 ( La. 2004)

. 1 9

There doe s a p p e a r t o be a lack of unanim ity in the East ern Di st ric t of Louis iana 2 0

regar ding the eff

ect of Di cke rso n’s pr onounc em ents

. Som e judges of that cour t app ear to have

ado pt e d t h e view that Di cke rso n’s dis cus sio n of the shi ft ing burd en of pr oduc tio n unde r

Louis iana law wa s dic tum ; othe r s h a ve expr es se d or dem ons tra ted conf usi on regar ding the

rule it art icula ted

. See, e. g.

, Ada ms v. Lexi ngton Insur. Co.

, No. 06-1 1388, 2009 WL 362446,

at *3 (E. D. La. Februa ry 11, 2009) (ho ldin g that “[ t] he Court a g ree s that the [p ert inent ]

language in Di ck ers on is dic ta. ”) ; Wei ser v. Ho ra ce Ma nn Insur. Co.

, No. 06-9 080, 200 9 WL

5194970

, at *4, n. 21 (E. D. La. Apri l 6, 2009) (no ting that “th e Court expr es se s doub t that the

Fift h Circ uit act ually alte red the st ate of the law ” in D i c k e r s on ); Pontcha rtra in Ga rde ns v.

State Farm Insur. Co. ,N o. 07-7 965, 2009 WL 86671, at *11 (E. D. La Januar y 13, 2009) (ho ldi ng

that “St ate Farm ’s mo tio n mi st ak enly ass ume s that plai ntif fs have the init ial burd en of

s e g regat ing thei r wi nd and wa ter dam age. But unde r Di cke rso n

, plai ntif fs mus t pr o v e o n l y

that the ins ured pr ope rty sus taine d so me wi nd dam age.” ); Lightel l v. State Farm Fir e and Cas.

Co.

, -- - F.S upp .2d

-- -, 2009 WL 4 505942, at *3 (E. D. La. 2009) (r eject ing ins urer ’s argum ent

that “th e Fift h Circ uit’ s inte rp ret atio n of the burd en shi ft ing is sim ply dic ta” and hold ing that

“th e hold ing in Di cke rso n and that the analys is of the burd en shi ft ing tes t wa s not dic ta, ” and

man dat ed that “Plai ntif fs ’ burd en at tri al wi ll be to pr ove that they are enti tle d to add itio nal

p a y m e n t s t o dam age to thei r pr ope rty. Plaint iff s do not have the burd en of se gregat ing th e

dam ages bas ed on cover ed and non- cover ed per ils .” ).

FDIC v. A bra ham

, 137 F.3d 264

, 267- 68 ( 5th Cir. 199 8). 2 1

9 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 9 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

t h e i n s u r e r t o e s t a b l i s h a n e x c l u s i o n u n d e r t h e t e r m s o f t h e p o l i c y

. ” A s w e 2 2

e x p l a i n e d i n D i c k e r s o n

, t h e L o u i s i a n a S u p r e m e C o u r t i n Jo n e s a d d r e s s e d t h e

r e s p e c t i v e p r o o f b u r d e n s o f t h e i n s u r e r a n d t h e i n s u r e d

, e x p l a i n i n g t h a t “ t h e

i n s u r e d b e a r s [ s i c ] t h e b u r d e n o f p r o v i n g a p o l i c y o f i n s u r a n c e a f f o r d s c o v e r a g e

f o r a n i n c i d e n t

, [ a n d ] t h e i n s u r e r b e a r s [ s i c ] t h e b u r d e n o f p r o v i n g t h e

a p p l i c a b i l i t y o f a n e x c l u s i o n a r y c l a u s e w i t h i n a p o l i c y

. ” 2 3

T h e p l a i n t i f

f i n Jo n e s s o u g h t t o r e c o v e r d a m a g e s f r o m t h e d e f

e n d a n t ’ s

h o m e o w n e r s p o l i c y f o r t h e s h o o t i n g d e a t h o f t h e p l a i n t i f f ’ s w i f e

. B e c a u s e t h e

s h o o t i n g h a d t o b e e i t h e r i n t e n t i o n a l o r a c c i d e n t a l a n d c o u l d n o t b e b o t h

, t h e

L o u i s i a n a S u p r e m e C o u r t w a s c o n f r o n t e d w i t h a s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d i s s u e o f

c o v e r a g e : W a s t h e s h o o t i n g i n q u e s t i o n a c o v e r e d r i s k ( a c c i d e n t a l d e a t h )

, o r w a s

c o v e r a g e n u l l i f

i e d b y a n e x c l u s i o n ? I n Jo n e s

, t h e c o u r t r u l e d t h a t t h e i n s u r e r ’ s

e v i d e n c e i n s u p p o r t o f i t s m o t i o n f o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t “ m a d e a p r i m a f a c i e

s h o w i n g t h a t t h e m o t i o n [ f o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t ] s h o u l d b e g r a n t e d

. A t t h a t

p o i n t

, t h e b u r d e n s h i f t e d t o t h e p l a i n t i f

f t o p r e s e n t e v i d e n c e d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h e r e

r e m a i n e d a m a t e r i a l i s s u e o f f a c t a s t o t h e i s s u e o f w h e t h e r t h e s h o o t i n g w a s

a c c i d e n t a l s u c h t h a t t h e e x c l u s i o n d i d n o t a p p l y

. ” 2 4

I n D i c k e r s o n

, w e a p p l i e d t h e r u l e a r t i c u l a t e d i n Jo n e s

— a s u m m a r y

j u d g m e n t p r o c e e d i n g

— t o a n a p p e a l c h a l l e n g i n g t h e s u f f i c i e n c y o f t h e e v i d e n c e

t o s u p p o r t a v e r d i c t f o r t h e i n s u r e d r e n d e r e d a t t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f a b e n c h t r i a l

.

L i k e t h e B a y l e s

, t h e i n s u r e d i n D i c k e r s o n f i l e d s u i t a g a i n s t t h e p r o v i d e r o f h i s

L A

. S T A T

. A N N

. R E V

. § 22:6 58(2 )( B)( 2007) red es ignate d § 22:1 893( 2)( B) by Acts 2008, 2 2

No. 415

, §1, ef

f. Jan

. 1, 2009.

Jones

, 870 So. 2d at 1010. 2 3

Id

. at 1011- 1012 (em phas is add ed)

. 2 4

1 0 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 10 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

h o m e o w n e r s i n s u r a n c e

, L e x i n g t o n

, a l l e g i n g t h a t i t h a d b r e a c h e d t h e i n s u r a n c e

c o n t r a c t b y f a i l i n g t o p a y t h e f u l l a m o u n t o w e d u n d e r t h e p o l i c y

. A l s o l i k e t h e

B a y l e s

, t h e i n s u r e d i n D i c k e r s o n s o u g h t d a m a g e s a n d s t a t u t o r y p e n a l t i e s f o r b a d

f a i t h u n d e r L o u i s i a n a l a w

. A n d

, l i k e t h e B a y l e s ’ p o l i c y w i t h A l l s t a t e

, 2 5

D i c k e r s o n ’ s p o l i c y w i t h L e x i n g t o n e x c l u d e d c o v e r a g e o f d a m a g e f r o m f l o o d

.

U n l i k e t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t i n t h e i n s t a n t c a s e

, h o w e v e r

, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t i n

D i c k e r s o n a d j u d i c a t e d t h e c l a i m a f t e r a b e n c h t r i a l

, r u l i n g i n f a v o r o f D i c k e r s o n

.

O n a p p e a l i n D i c k e r s o n

, L e x i n g t o n s p e c i f i c a l l y c h a l l e n g e d t h e s u f f i c i e n c y

o f t h e e v i d e n c e o f

f e r e d t o p r o v e t h a t t h e d a m a g e w a s c a u s e d b y w i n d

. B e c a u s e

o u r r e v i e w o f t h e s u f f i c i e n c y o f t h e t r i a l e v i d e n c e t u r n s o n t h e a n s w e r t o t h e

q u e s t i o n w h i c h p a r t y h a d t h e b u r d e n o f p r o o f a t t r i a l

, w e a r t i c u l a t e d t h e

r e s p e c t i v e b u r d e n s o f p r o d u c t i o n o n t h e i n s u r e r a n d t h e i n s u r e d u n d e r L o u i s i a n a

l a w

, s t a t i n g t h a t :

[ u ] n d e r L o u i s i a n a l a w

, t h e i n s u r e d m u s t p r o v e t h a t t h e c l a i m

a s s e r t e d i s c o v e r e d b y h i s p o l i c y

. J o n e s v

. E s t a t e o f S a n t i a g o

, 8 7 0

S o

. 2 d 1 0 0 2

, 1 0 1 0 ( L a

. 2 0 0 4 ) ; C o m e a u x v

. S t a t e F a r m F i r e & C a s

. C o

. , 9 8 6 S o

. 2 d 1 5 3

, 1 5 7

- 5 8 ( L a

. A p p

. 5 t h C i r

. 2 0 0 8 )

. O n c e h e h a s

d o n e t h i s

, t h e i n s u r e r h a s t h e b u r d e n o f d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h a t t h e

d a m a g e a t i s s u e i s e x c l u d e d f r o m c o v e r a g e

. Jo n e s v

. E s t a t e o f

S a n t i a g o

, 8 7 0 S o

. 2 d a t 1 0 1 0

. T h u s

, o n c e D i c k e r s o n p r o v e d h i s h o m e

w a s d a m a g e d b y w i n d

, t h e b u r d e n s h i f t e d t o L e x i n g t o n t o p r o v e t h a t

f l o o d i n g c a u s e d t h e d a m a g e a t i s s u e

, t h e r e b y e x c l u d i n g c o v e r a g e

u n d e r t h e h o m e o w n e r s p o l i c y

. A s n o o n e d i s p u t e s t h a t a t l e a s t s o m e

o f t h e d a m a g e t o t h e D i c k e r s o n h o m e w a s c o v e r e d b y t h e

h o m e o w n e r s p o l i c y

, L e x i n g t o n h a d t o p r o v e h o w m u c h o f t h a t

d a m a g e w a s c a u s e d b y f l o o d i n g a n d w a s t h u s e x c l u d e d f r o m

c o v e r a g e u n d e r i t s p o l i c y

. 2 6

L A

. R E V

. S T A T

. A N N

. §§ 22:1 220 and 22:6 58 ( 2007)

. 2 5

Di cke rso n

, 556 F.3d at 295

. 2 6

1 1 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 11 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

W e n e x t r e v i e w e d t h e e v i d e n c e a d d u c e d a t t r i a l b y b o t h L e x i n g t o n a n d t h e

i n s u r e d

, o b s e r v i n g t h a t “ t h e q u e s t i o n o f f l o o d v e r s u s w i n d d a m a g e e s s e n t i a l l y

t u r n e d o n w i t n e s s c r e d i b i l i t y

, a s t h e q u a n t i t y a n d q u a l i t y o f t h e e v i d e n c e

a d d u c e d b y e a c h p a r t y w a s s i m i l a r

. ” W e t h e n a f f i r m e d t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ’ s 2 7

j u d g m e n t

.

E v e n t h o u g h i n D i c k e r s o n w e w e r e n o t r u l i n g o n a n a p p e a l f r o m a g r a n t

o f s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t

— w h e r e

, “ [ i ] f t h e b u r d e n a t t r i a l r e s t s o n t h e n o n

- m o v a n t

,

t h e m o v a n t m u s t m e r e l y d e m o n s t r a t e a n a b s e n c e o f e v i d e n t i a r y s u p p o r t i n t h e

r e c o r d f o r t h e n o n

- m o v a n t ’ s c a s e ”

— t h e p r o p e r a l l o c a t i o n o f t h e b u r d e n o f p r o o f 2 8

n e c e s s a r i l y i m p l i c a t e d t h e s t a n d a r d o f r e v i e w o f a c h a l l e n g e t o t h e s u f f i c i e n c y o f

t h e e v i d e n c e

. T h i s i s b e c a u s e “ [ t ] h e j u d g e m u s t v i e w t h e e v i d e n c e p r e s e n t e d 2 9

Id. at 295. 2 7

Mi ss. Riv er Basi c Al li anc e v. Wes tpha l

, 230 F.3d 170, 1 7 4 ( 5 t h C i r

. 2000)

. Cel otex 2 8

Corp

. v. Catre tt, 477 U. S. 317, 32 (198 6) “[ T]he plai n langua g e o f Rule 56(c ) man dat es the

entr y of sum mar y judgm ent, aft er ade quate tim e for dis cove r y a n d u pon mo tio n, agains t a

par ty wh o fai ls to mak e a sho wi ng suf fic ient to es tabl ish the exis tenc e of an elem ent es se ntial

to t h a t par ty’s cas e, and on wh ich that par ty wi ll bear the burd en of pr oof at tri al

. . . . The

mo ving part y is ‘ent itle d to a judgm ent as a mat ter of law ’ becau se the nonm oving part y has

fai led to mak e a suf

fic ient sho wi ng on an es se ntial elem ent of her case with resp ect to which

she has t he burd en of pr oof .” ).

Ande rso n v. Libe rty Lobby, Inc., 4 7 7 U

. S

. 2 42, 252 (198 6) (ho ldi ng that “w e are 2 9

convin ced that the inquir y invol v e d i n a r u ling on a mo tio n for sum ma ry judgm ent or for a

dir ecte d ve rdi ct nece ss aril y im pli cat es the sub st antive evide ntiar y st andar d of pr o o f that

wo uld app ly at tri al on the me rit s. ”) (em phas is add ed) ; Al ls tate Ins. Co. v. Rec ei va ble Fin. Co.

, L

. L

. C

. , 501 F.3d 398, 405 (5t h Cir. 2007) (“ A mo tio n for judgm ent as a mat ter of law

(p revio usl y, mo ti o n for dir ect ed verd ict or J.N .O .V. ) in an act ion tri ed by jury is a chall enge

to the legal suf

fic ienc y of the evide nce sup por ting the jury’s verd ict .” ); Hi ltgen v. Sumr al l

, 47

F.3d 695, 703 (5t h Cir. 1995) (“ We mus t be esp ecia lly care ful w hen revie wi ng the suff icie ncy

of the evide nce wh ere the par ty se ek ing reli ef, the def enda nts in this cas e, had the burden of

pr oof on t he iss ue in ques tio n.” ).

1 2 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 12 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

t h r o u g h t h e p r i s m o f t h e s u b s t a n t i v e e v i d e n t i a r y b u r d e n

. ” I n s u m

— a n d 3 0

c o n t r a r y t o A l l s t a t e ’ s f i r s t c o n t e n t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e i m p o r t o f D i c k e r s o n

— o u r

a r t i c u l a t i o n o f t h e a l l o c a t i o n o f t h e b u r d e n o f p r o o f i n D i c k e r s o n w a s n o t d i c t u m

,

a l t h o u g h A l l s t a t e w a s c o r r e c t t h a t i t d i d n o t a l t e r t h e r u l e s e t f o r t h i n Jo n e s

.

N e i t h e r

, h o w e v e r

, d o e s D i c k e r s o n s t a n d f o r t h e p r o p o s i t i o n a d v a n c e d b y

t h e B a y l e s t h a t t h e i n s u r e r a l o n e m u s t b e a r t h e b u r d e n o f p r o d u c i n g e v i d e n c e

t o s e g r e g a t e c o v e r e d l o s s e s f r o m e x c l u d e d l o s s e s

, a t l e a s t n o t a t t h e s u m m a r y

j u d g m e n t s t a g e

. B o t h t h e B a y l e s a n d A l l s t a t e a p p e a r t o c o n f u s e t h e b u r d e n o f

p e r s u a s i o n w i t h t h e b u r d e n o f p r o d u c t i o n

. A s t h e L o u i s i a n a S u p r e m e C o u r t

m a d e c l e a r i n Jo n e s

, a n d a s o u r r e a s o n i n g i n D i c k e r s o n r e f l e c t s

, t h e i n s u r e d

m u s t c a r r y t h e b u r d e n o f p e r s u a s i o n t o e s t a b l i s h t h a t a n y u n c o m p e n s a t e d ( o r

u n d e r

- c o m p e n s a t e d ) d a m a g e w a s c a u s e d b y a c o v e r e d p e r i l

. S i m p l y p u t

, t h i s i s

w h a t i s m e a n t b y t h e r u l e t h a t t h e i n s u r e d m u s t p r o v e c o v e r a g e u n d e r t h e

p o l i c y

. T h e n

, i f t h e d e f e n d a n t

- i n s u r e r w i s h e s t o a v o i d l i a b i l i t y b y r e l y i n g o n a

3 1

Ande rso n

, 477 U. S. at 252

. 3 0

Do e r r v

. M

o b il Oi l Corp

. , 774 So. 2d 119, 123- 24 (La. 2000) (“ When det erm ining 3 1

wh ethe r or not a pol icy aff ord s cover age for an incid ent, it is the burd en of the ins ured to pr ove

the inc ide nt fal ls w ithi n the pol icy’s term s. On the othe r hand, t he insu rer bears the burd en

of pr oving the app lica bilit y of an exclus ionar y claus e wi thin a pol icy. ”) (c itat ions om itt ed) ; Lee

v. Tay lor

, 808 So. 2d 407, 410 (La. App

. 1st Cir. 2000) (“ The ins ured bear s the burd en of pr oof

to es tabl ish every fac t es se ntial to a caus e of act ion unde r the pol icy cover age.” ); Whi tham v.

Loui si ana Fa rm Bur ea u Ca s. Insu r. Co., 34 So.3d 1104, 1107 (La . App

. 2d Cir. 201 0) (“ In an

act ion unde r an ins uranc e cont rac t, the insu red bears the burd en of pr oving the exis tenc e of

pol icy and cover age. The ins urer

, how ever, bear s the burd en of sho wi ng pol icy lim its or

exclus ions ” and ther efo re “[ b]e caus e La. Farm Bureau is relyi ng on an exclus ionar y pr ovis ion

in the pol icy it has the burden of sho wi ng

. . . that the F-150 tru ck wa s ‘furnis hed for regula r

use ’ as requ ired to sat isf y the language of the exclus ionar y claus e) (c itat ions om itt ed) ); Landr y

v

. L o u i s i ana Citiz ens ’ Prop erty Insur. Co.

, 964 So. 2d 463, 478 (La. App

. 3d Cir. 200 7 )

(r eview ing st ate law in the cont ext of a chall enge to inde mni ty for a tot al los s wh en both wi nd

and flo od cont ribut ed to the loss and conclud ing “p roo f of coverage, toget her with a[s ]ho wi ng

[s ic] that wi nd dam age wa s suf fer ed dur ing the cour se of a st orm

, cre ates a r e b uttable

1 3 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 13 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

p o l i c y e x c l u s i o n f

r o m c o v e r a g e

, i t h a s t h e b u r d e n o f p e r s u a s i o n t o e s t a b l i s h t h a t

t h e u n c o m p e n s a t e d o r u n d e r

- c o m p e n s a t e d d a m a g e i s s u b j e c t t o a n e x c l u s i o n

.

C o n t r a r y t o A l l s t a t e ’ s s e c o n d c o n t e n t i o n

, w e h a v e f o u n d n o t h i n g i n L o u i s i a n a

l a w t o s u g g e s t t h a t t h e s e r e s p e c t i v e b u r d e n s o f p e r s u a s i o n s h i f t b e t w e e n t h e

p a r t i e s

. W h a t d o e s s h i f t

— b u t o n l y d u r i n g t h e s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t s t a g e

— i s t h e

b u r d e n o f p r o d u c t i o n

. B e c a u s e a t t r i a l t h e d e f e n d a n t

- i n s u r e r h a s t h e u l t i m a t e

b u r d e n o f

p e r s u a s i o n t h a t t h e e x c l u s i o n i s a p p l i c a b l e

, a d e f e n d a n t

- i n s u r e r t h a t

m o v e s f o r s u m m a r

y j u d g m e n t m u s t b e a r t h e b u r d e n o f p r o d u c i n g e v i d e n c e t o

m a k e o u t a “ p r i m a f a c i e ” c a s e t h a t t h e c a u s e o f t h e u n c o m p e n s a t e d o r u n d e r

c o m p e n s a t e d d a m a g e w a s e x c l u d e d f r o m c o v e r a g e

. I f t h e d e f e n d a n t

- i n s u r e r d o e s

s o

, “ t h e b u r d e n s h i f

t [ s ] t o t h e [ i n s u r e d ] t o p r e s e n t e v i d e n c e d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h e r e

r e m a i n [ s ] a m a t e r i a l i s s u e o f f a c t

. ” 3 2

A s Jo n e s m a k e s c l e a r

, t h i s s i m p l e

, b u r d e n

- s h i f t i n g m i n u e t a r i s e s f

r o m t h e

e f f e c t o f s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t o n t h e b u r d e n s o f p r o d u c t i o n a n d n o t a n y s h i f t

p r e s u m p tion of ca usa li ty .” ), af f’ d in pa rt, va ca ted in pa rt on other grounds by Landr y v

. Loui si ana Citiz ens ’ Prop erty Insur. Co. 983 So. 2d 66 (La

. 2008) ; Stew ar t v. Loui si ana Farm

Burea u Mut. Insur. Co.

, 420 So. 2d 1217, 1219 (La. App

. 3d 1982) (“ the ins urer has the burd en

of pr oving fac ts wh ich limit its cove rage” ) (c itin g Ma ss. Protecti ve Ass oc v. Ferguso n , 168 La.

271, 121 So. 863 (192 9)) ; Com ea ux v. State Farm Insur. Co., 986 So. 2d 153, 154 (La. App

. 5th

C i r

. 2 0 0 8) (“ altho ugh the ins urer has the burd en to sho w an exclus ion app lies

, we fin d t h a t

Sta te Farm here is not relyi ng on an exclus ion to avoid paying the clai m

. . . . [be caus e] State

Farm ack now led ges that ALE wa s due pur sua n t t o t h e hom eow ners pol icy and paid

acc ord ingly. The iss ue here is wh ethe r the paym ent wa s suf fic ient to me et Sta te Farm 's

obligat ion. ”)

.

Whi tham , 34 So. 2d. at 1011- 1012. C O U C H O N I N S U R A N C E § 175:9 (3rd ed. 2006) (“ It 3 2

is an ins ured ’s burd en to pr oduc e evide nce that wo uld aff ord a reas onable bas is for es tim ating

the amo unt of dam age or the pr opo rti onat e par t of dam age caus ed by the cover ed pe r i l and

that by the exclud ed per il. ”)

.

1 4 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 14 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

b e t w e e n t h e p a r t i e s ’ r e s p e c t i v e b u r d e n s o f p e r s u a s i o n

. B e c a u s e D i c k e r s o n 3 3

a d d r e s s e d t h e s u f

f i c i e n c y o f t h e e v i d e n c e a d d u c e d a t t r i a l

, i t w a s n o t c o n c e r n e d

w i t h t h e s h i f

t i n g o f t h e b u r d e n s o f p r o d u c t i o n t h a t c h a r a c t e r i z e s s u m m a r y

j u d g m e n t

.

2

. B u r d e n s o f P r o d u c t i o n a t S u m m a r y J u d g m e n t

H e r e

, b e c a u s e A l l s t a t e m o v e d f o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t

, a n d b e c a u s e A l l s t a t e

w o u l d h a v e h a d t h e b u r d e n o f p r o v i n g a t t r i a l t h a t f l o o d

, n o t w i n d

, c a u s e d t h e

u n c o m p e n s a t e d o r u n d e r

- c o m p e n s a t e d d a m a g e c l a i m e d b y t h e B a y l e s

, A l l s t a t e

h a d t h e b u r d e n o f p r o d u c i n g e v i d e n c e i n s u p p o r t o f i t s m o t i o n t o e s t a b l i s h t h a t

t h e r e e x i s t e d n o i s s u e o f m a t e r i a l f a c t r e g a r d i n g t h e c a u s e o f t h e u n c o m p e n s a t e d

o r u n d e r

- c o m p e n s a t e d d a m a g e f o r w h i c h t h e B a y l e s s o u g h t i n d e m n i f i c a t i o n

.

U n l i k e t h e i n s u r e r

- d e f e n d a n t i n Jo n e s

, h o w e v e r

, A l l s t a t e d i d n o t c o n t e s t t h a t a

c o v e r e d p e r i l ( w i n d ) c a u s e d s o m e o f t h e d a m a g e t o s o m e o f t h e B a y l e s ’ p r o p e r t y ;

t h e q u e s t i o n w a s w h i c h p a r t i c u l a r i t e m s o f p r o p e r t y w e r e d a m a g e d b y w i n d ; o r

,

p u t d i f f e r e n t l y

, w h a t i s t h e e x t e n t o f t h e d a m a g e i n c u r r e d b y t h o s e i t e m s t h a t

Befo re unde rta ki ng its analys is, t h e Jones cour t expla ined that rec ent revis ions to 3 3

Louis iana’ s Code of Civil Proc edur e clar ifi ed the burd en of pr oof in sum mar y judgm ent

pr oce edi ngs suc h that “[ t] he init ial burd en of pr oof rem ains wi th the mo ver to sho w that no

genuine i s s u e o f mat eria l fac t exis ts

. If the mo ver has ma de a pr im a fa ci e show ing that the

mo tio n sho uld be grant ed, the burd en shi ft s to the non- mo ving par ty to pr ese nt e v i d e nce

dem ons tra ting that a mater ial fac tual is sue rem ains . The fai lure of the non-m oving par ty to

pr oduc e evide nce of a mat eria l fac tual disp ute mandat es the granting of the mo tio n.” Jones

, 870 So. 2d at 1006, & n.5 (em phas is add ed)

. It is in this cont ext t h a t w e r e a d Jones ’s late r

st atem ent that “w e conc lude that def enda nt ma de a pr im a fa ci e show ing that the mo tio n

sho uld be grant ed. At that poi nt, the burde n shi fted to the pl ai ntif f to pr es e n t e vi denc e

dem ons tra ting ther e rem ained a mat e r i a l i s s ue of fac t as to the iss ue of *1011 wh ethe r the

sho oti ng w as acc ide ntal suc h t hat the **14 exclus ion did not app ly.” Id. at 1010. Com pa re

Cel otrex Corp

. v. Catre tt

, 4778 U. S. 317, 331 (198 6) (“ The burd en of pr oduc tio n im pos ed by

Rule 56 requ ires the mo v i n g p a r t y t o mak e a pr im a fac ie sho wi ng that it is enti tle d to

sum mar y judgm ent

. . . . The man ner in wh ich this sho wi ng can be mad e dep ends upon wh ich

par ty wi ll bear t he burd en of per sua sio n o n t he chall enged c laim at t rial .” ).

1 5 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 15 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

w a s c a u s e d b y w i n d

. C o m p l i c a t i n g A l l s t a t e ’ s t a s k

, h o w e v e r

, w a s t h e f a c t t h a t a t

n o p o i n t d i d t h e B a y l e s i d e n t i f y w h i c h p a r t i c u l a r d a m a g e d i t e m s h a d g o n e

u n c o m p e n s a t e d o r u n d e r

- c o m p e n s a t e d u n d e r t h e i r h o m e o w n e r s p o l i c y ’s c o v e r a g e

f o r s t r u c t u r a l d a m a g e

. T h e y s i m p l y p r e s e n t e d t h e c o u r t w i t h a l i n e

- i t e m c o s t 3 4

e s t i m a t e t o r e p a i r a l l t h e d a m a g e t o t h e i r p r o p e r t y

, w i t h o u t e v e n a t t e m p t i n g t o

e x p l a i n w h i c h p o r t i o n o r p o r t i o n s o f t h o s e c o s t s a r e a t t r i b u t a b l e t o w i n d

- c a u s e d

d a m a g e

.

I n c o n t r a s t

, t o s u p p o r t i t s m o t i o n f o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t A l l s t a t e p r o f f e r e d

( 1 ) t h e B a y l e s ’ d e p o s i t i o n t e s t i m o n y

, ( 2 ) i t s o w n a d j u s t e r s ’ r e p o r t s

, a n d ( 3 ) t h e

e x p e r t t e s t i m o n y o f O ’ K e e d a

, w h i c h t o g e t h e r s p e c i f i c a l l y i t e m i z e d a n d q u a n t i f i e d

t h e d a m a g e c a u s e d b y w i n d a s o p p o s e d t o f l o o d

. T h e t o t a l i t y o f t h i s e v i d e n c e

d e m o n s t r a t e s t h a t t h e B a y l e s ’ o n e

- s t o r y h o u s e t o o k i n e i g h t t o t e n f e e t o f w a t e r

,

t h a t t h e r o o f a n d w i n d o w s w e r e l e f t e s s e n t i a l l y i n t a c t

, t h a t o i l f r o m a n e a r b y

t a n k a l s o c o n t a m i n a t e d t h e p r o p e r t y

, a n d t h a t t h e a m o u n t s p a i d b y A l l s t a t e

u n d e r t h e p o l i c y ’ s w i n d c o v e r a g e

— $ 3

, 6 2 8

. 8 7 f o r s t r u c t u r a l d a m a g e

, $ 8

, 8 0 4

. 2 2 f o r

c o n t e n t s

, a n d $ 5

, 1 2 7

. 6 4 f o r A L E

— w e r e s u f

f i c i e n t

.

O n a p p e a l

, t h e B a y l e s u r g e u s ( 1 ) t o f i n d t h a t t h e d i s p a r i t y b e t w e e n t h e

g r o s s a m o u n t o f t h e i r e s t i m a t e a n d t h e a m o u n t t h a t t h e y r e c e i v e d f r o m A l l s t a t e

u n d e r t h e i r p o l i c y ’ s w i n d c o v e r a g e p r o v e s t h a t s o m e “ u n c o m p e n s a t e d d a m a g e ”

d o e s r e m a i n “ u n c o m p e n s a t e d

, ” a n d ( 2 ) t o r u l e t h a t A l l s t a t e c a n n o t b e g r a n t e d

s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t u n l e s s i t p r o d u c e s e v i d e n c e t h a t “ s e g r e g a t e s d a m a g e s ”

Altho ugh the Bayles als o com plai ned about the amo unt they r e c e i v e d f or cont ents 3 4

dam age unde r thei r hom eow ners pol icy’s cover age, they have not brie fed this iss ue on app eal

so w e d eem it w aived

.

1 6 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 16 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

c a u s e d b y w i n d f

r o m t h o s e c a u s e d b y f l o o d

. I n s o c o n t e n d i n g

, h o w e v e r

, t h e

3 5

B a y l e s f a i l t o r e c o g n i z e t h a t w h e n A l l s t a t e a d d u c e d e v i d e n c e s u f f i c i e n t t o

e s t a b l i s h a p r i m a f a c i e c a s e t h a t f l o o d

, n o t w i n d

, c a u s e d a n y u n c o m p e n s a t e d o r

u n d e r

- c o m p e n s a t e d d a m a g e c o m p l a i n e d o f b y t h e B a y l e s

, t h e b u r d e n o f

p r o d u c t i o n s h i f

t e d t o t h e B a y l e s t o o f f e r r e b u t t a l e v i d e n c e s u f f i c i e n t t o c r e a t e a

g e n u i n e i s s u e o f m a t e r i a l f a c t a s t o w h i c h

, i f a n y

, u n c o m p e n s a t e d i t e m s o f

d a m a g e w e r e c a u s e d b y w i n d

. U n l i k e t h e p l a i n t i f f i n D i c k e r s o n

, t h e B a y l e s ’ 3 6

e x p e r t r e p o r t d i d n o t v e n t u r e t h e c a u s e s o f t h e d a m a g e t o a n y p a r t i c u l a r i t e m s

.

T h e B a y l e s a l s o f a i l e d t o p r o f f e r a n y e v i d e n c e t o s h o w t h a t t h e y w e r e u n d e r

c o m p e n s a t e d f

o r a n y d a m a g e a d m i t t e d l y c a u s e d b y w i n d

. C o n s e q u e n t l y

,

s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t w a s p r o p e r b e c a u s e t h e B a y l e s d i d n o t b e a r t h e i r b u r d e n o f

p r o d u c t i o n a f

t e r A l l s t a t e h a d p r o d u c e d e v i d e n c e i d e n t i f y i n g t h o s e i t e m s o f

d a m a g e t h a t w e r e e x c l u d e d f r o m w i n d c o v e r a g e b e c a u s e t h e y w e r e c a u s e d b y

f l o o d

.

We note here that the Bayles app ear to conf late the noti on of dam ag e wi th dam ag es ; 3 5

t he latt er in fac t being the dol lar amo unt of the for me r, and we coul d find no sugges tio n in

Louis iana law that ins ured s are ever reli eved of the burd en of pr oving dam a g e s

. Mo bil

Expl ora tion & Produc ing U. S., Inc., v. Ca j u n C o n str. Serv s.

, 45 F.3d 96, 101 (5t h Cir. 1995)

(ho ldi ng that “‘[ u]nd er Louis iana law

, the plai ntif f mus t pr ove dam ages wi th reas onable

cer taint y.

. . .” ).

We note here that if the ins ured s have alre ady rec overe d a suf fic ient amo unt unde r 3 6

thei r fl ood pol icy for so me dam ag e a l l eged ly caus ed by wi nd, the ins ured s may not rec over

tw ice by claim ing the dam age under its hom eow ners polic y for wi nd dam age. Alt hough this

rule app ears to cre ate per vers e ince ntives wh en the flo od ins urer is the fed eral governm ent

and the wi nd- dam age ins urer is the pr ivate ins uranc e com pany that als o adm inis ter s the

fed eral flo od pol ic y, Louis iana law nevert heles s bars ins ured s fr om rec overi ng tw ice for the

sam e dam age. Cole v. Cel otex

, 599 So. 2d 1058, 1080 (La. 1992)

. Indeed

, if ther e ever be a cas e

in wh ich ther e app ears to be any se lf- dea ling by a t wo -hat ted ins urer unde r suc h

cir cum st ance s, it wo uld be the feder al governm ent and not the ins ured s that wo uld have the

put ative reim burs em ent clai m.

1 7 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 17 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

C

. V a l u a t i o n & t h e S u f f i c i e n c y o f t h e A m o u n t R e c o v e r e d f o r

S t r u c t u r a l D a m a g e s

1

. V a l u a t i o n

— A C V o r “ b u i l d i n g s t r u c t u r e r e i m b u r s e m e n t ? ”

T h e B a y l e s a l s o c h a l l e n g e t h e s u f f i c i e n c y o f t h e p a y m e n t t h e y r e c e i v e d f o r

s t r u c t u r a l d a m a g e

, c l a i m i n g t h a t t h e i r d a m a g e s s h o u l d h a v e b e e n c a l c u l a t e d

u n d e r t h e p o l i c y ’ s “ b u i l d i n g s t r u c t u r e r e i m b u r s e m e n t ” p r o v i s i o n

. A l l s t a t e ( a n d

t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ) r e j e c t e d t h e p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t a n y o f t h e B a y l e s ’ s t r u c t u r a l

d a m a g e s h o u l d b e c a l c u l a t e d u n d e r t h e “ b u i l d i n g s t r u c t u r e r e i m b u r s e m e n t ”

p r o v i s i o n

, m a i n t a i n i n g t h a t t h e B a y l e s w e r e l i m i t e d t o t h e A C V o f t h e p r o p e r t y

.

T h e B a y l e s ’ h o m e o w n e r s p o l i c y e x p l i c i t l y i d e n t i f i e s w h e n t h e p o l i c y h o l d e r

m a y r e c o v e r u n d e r t h e “ b u i l d i n g s t r u c t u r e r e i m b u r s e m e n t ” c l a u s e a s o p p o s e d t o

r e c o v e r i n g u n d e r t h e “ a c t u a l c a s h v a l u e ” c l a u s e :

( a ) A c t u a l C a s h V a l u e : I f y o u d o n o t r e

p a i r o r r e

p l a c e t h e d a m a g e d

. . . p r o p e r t y

, p a y m e n t w i l l b e o n a n a c t u a l c a s h v a l u e b a s i s

. T h i s

m e a n s t h a t t h e r e m a y b e a d e d u c t i o n f o r d e p r e c i a t i o n

. . . .

Y o u m a y m a k e c l a i m f o r a d d i t i o n a l p a y m e n t [ f o r b u i l d i n g s t r u c t u r e

r e i m b u r s e m e n t ]

, i f y o u r e p a i r o r r e p l a c e t h e d a m a g e d

, d e s t r o y e d o r

s t o l e n p r o p e r t y w i t h i n 1 8 0 d a y s o f t h e a c t u a l c a s h v a l u e p a y m e n t

.

( b ) B u i l d i n g S t r u c t u r e R e i m b u r s e m e n t :

. . . [ W ] e w i l l m a k e

a d d i t i o n a l p a y m e n t t o r e i m b u r s e y o u f o r c o s t i n e x c e s s o f a c t u a l

c a s h v a l u e i f y o u r e

p a i r

, r e b u i l d o r r e

p l a c e d a m a g e d

. . . c o v e r e d

p r o p e r t y w i t h i n 1 8 0 d a y s o f t h e a c t u a l c a s h v a l u e p a y m e n t

. . . .

I f y o u r e p l a c e t h e d a m a g e d b u i l d i n g s t r u c t u r e ( s ) a t a n a d d r e s s o t h e r

t h a n s h o w n o n t h e P o l i c y D e c l a r a t i o n s t h r o u g h c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a

n e w s t r u c t u r e o r p u r c h a s e o f a n e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r e

, s u c h r e p l a c e m e n t

w i l l n o t i n c r e a s e t h e a m o u n t p a y a b l e u n d e r B u i l d i n g S t r u c t u r e

R e i m b u r s e m e n t d e s c r i b e d a b o v e

. . . .

1 8 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 18 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

( E m p h a s i s a d d e d )

I t i s u n d i s p u t e d t h a t t h e B a y l e s n e i t h e r r e p a i r e d t h e i r d a m a g e d p r o p e r t y

n o r r e p l a c e d i t o n t h e s a m e l o t

. A n d

, a l t h o u g h t h e y d i d p u r c h a s e a

c o n d o m i n i u m

, i t w a s a t a d i f f e r e n t l o c a t i o n

. M o r e o v e r

, f o r t h e B a y l e s t o r e c o v e r

u n d e r t h e “ b u i l d i n g s t r u c t u r e r e i m b u r s e m e n t ” c l a u s e

, t h e c o n d o m i n i u m m u s t

h a v e b e e n p u r c h a s e d w i t h i n 1 8 0 d a y s o f A l l s t a t e ’ s l a s t a c t u a l c a s h v a l u e

p a y m e n t t o t h e B a y l e s

. N o n e c o n t e s t s t h a t t h e c o n d o m i n i u m w a s n o t 3 7

p u r c h a s e d w i t h i n 1 8 0 d a y s o f A l l s t a t e ’ s l a s t a c t u a l c a s h v a l u e p a y m e n t t o t h e

B a y l e s

. “ ‘ L o u i s i a n a l a w

. . . p l a c e s t h e b u r d e n o n t h e [ i n s u r e d ] t o e s t a b l i s h

3 8

e v e r y f a c t e s s e n t i a l t o r e c o v e r y a n d t o e s t a b l i s h t h a t t h e c l a i m f a l l s w i t h i n t h e

p o l i c y c o v e r a g e

, ’ ” a n d t h e B a y l e s f a i l e d t o a d d u c e a n y e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e i r 3 9

c o n d o m i n i u m w a s p u r c h a s e d w i t h i n t h e r e q u i s i t e 1 8 0

- d a y p e r i o d

. T h e y h a v e

t h u s f a i l e d t o d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t t h e r e i s a g e n u i n e i s s u e o f m a t e r i a l f a c t

c o n c e r n i n g w h e t h e r t h e “ b u i l d i n g s t r u c t u r e r e i m b u r s e m e n t c l a u s e ” a p p l i e s

. T h e

In the dist ric t cour t, the Bayles ass ert ed that Alls tat e wa ived the ACV ter ms of the 3 7

pol icy wh en it paid $3,6 28.8 7 in “re plac em ent cos t” for wi nd dam age. As this cont enti on wa s

rejec ted by the dis tri ct cour t in its opi nion grant ing sum mar y judgm ent, how e v e r

, and the

Bayles have no t rais ed it again on app eal, w e s hall not add res s it.

Alls tat e als o advanc es se veral alte rnat ive argum ents wh y the cond om inium doe s not 3 8

qualif y as r epl acem ent pr ope rty. As Alls tat e’s prim ary argum ent is suff icie nt, howe ver, we

need no t add res s its al ter native ar gume nts

.

Wil li am s v

. A ll state Indem nity Co.

, 359 Fed. App ’x. 471, 473 (5t h Cir. 2009) 3 9

(unp ublis hed) (c itin g Ho v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co.

, 862 So. 2d 1278, 1281 (La .Ap p. 3rd

Cir. 2003) and Do err v. Mo bil Oi l Corp

. , 774 So. 2d 119, 124 (La. 2000) (“ When d e t e r m i n ing

wh ethe r or not a pol icy aff ord s cover age for an incid ent, it is the burd en of the ins ured to pr ove

the inc ide nt fal ls w ithi n the pol icy's term s. On the othe r hand, t he insu rer bears the burd en

of p r o v i n g the app lica bilit y of an exclus ionar y claus e wi thin a pol icy. ” (c itat ions om itt ed) ),

mo dif ie d o n o ther grounds

, 782 So. 2d 573 (La. 2001)

.

1 9 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 19 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

d i s t r i c t c o u r t d i d n o t e r r i n c o n c l u d i n g t h a t t h e B a y l e s a r e n o t e n t i t l e d t o a n y

p a y m e n t s f

o r s t r u c t u r a l d a m a g e i n e x c e s s o f t h e A C V o f t h e i r h o u s e

.

2

. T h e S u f

f i c i e n c y o f t h e A C V R e i m b u r s e m e n t

T h e p a r t i e s a l s o d i s a g r e e a b o u t t h e c o r r e c t A C V o f t h e h o u s e a n d a b o u t

w h e t h e r t h e p a y m e n t s t h a t t h e B a y l e s h a v e a l r e a d y r e c e i v e d h a v e f u l l y

i n d e m n i f

i e d t h e m f

o r d a m a g e c a u s e d b y w i n d

. A s n o t e d

, t h e B a y l e s d i d n o t o f f e r

t h e i r o w n c a l c u l a t i o n o f A C V ; r a t h e r

, t h r o u g h t h e i r e x p e r t r e p o r t

, t h e y o f f e r e d

o n l y t h e t o t a l R C V o f t h e h o u s e

. A l l s t a t e

, f o r i t s p a r t

, p r o f

f e r e d e v i d e n c e o f

t w o

A C V s u m s : ( 1 ) I n a n e a r l y r e p o r t s u b m i t t e d t o t h e N F I P

, a c o p y o f w h i c h w a s

i n c l u d e d i n A l l s t a t e ’ s s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t e v i d e n c e

, t h e A C V o f t h e h o m e w a s

l i s t e d a s $ 7 4

, 2 8 4

. 8 0 ; ( 2 ) i n i t s s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t b r i e f s

, A l l s t a t e a d v a n c e d

a n o t h e r A C V s u m

, w h i c h w a s c a l c u l a t e d b y i t s e x p e r t

, O ’ K e e d a

, t o b e $ 1 0 8

, 2 2 0

.

T h e m e r e e x i s t e n c e o f t h e s e t w o c o m p e t i n g f i g u r e s

, a r g u e t h e B a y l e s

, s i g n a l s

t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s a g e n u i n e i s s u e o f m a t e r i a l f a c t w h i c h p r e c l u d e s s u m m a r y

j u d g m e n t

. A l l s t a t e c o u n t e r s t h a t

, w h e n t h e B a y l e s ’ r e c o v e r i e s f o r b o t h f

l o o d a n d

w i n d a r e c o m b i n e d w i t h t h e i r r e c o v e r y f r o m t h e s a l e o f t h e i r p r o p e r t y t o M u r p h y

O i l

, t h e B a y l e s r e c o v e r e d $ 1 3 2

, 6 2 8

. 8 7 i n s t r u c t u r a l d a m a g e s t o t h e i r p r o p e r t y

,

w h i c h e x c e e d s b o t h f i g u r e s t h a t A l l s t a t e p r o d u c e d i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h i t s m o t i o n

f o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t

.

W i t h o u t r u l i n g o n t h e i m p o r t

, i f a n y

, o f A l l s t a t e ’ s d u e l i n g f i g u r e s

, o r o n i t s

c l a i m t h a t t h e B a y l e s ’ A C V s h o u l d t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t a l l o r s o m e p o r t i o n o f i t s

r e c o v e r y f

r o m M u r p h y O i l

, w e h o l d t h a t t h i s i s s u e i s i m m a t e r i a l i n t h e l i g h t o f 4 0

Louis iana has mad e it clea r t h a t t h e i n sur eds may “re cover unde r all availabl e 4 0

cover ages pr ovide d that ther e is no doub le rec overy. ” The paym ent obta ined fr om Mur phy Oi l,

how ever, wa s not an inde mni fic atio n pur sua nt to an ins uranc e cont rac t. Cole v. Cel otex

, 599

S o

. 2 d 1058, 1080 (La. 1992) (quo ting 15A Couch on Insur ance § 56:3 4 (2d ed. 1983) ). This

2 0 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 20 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

o u r o v e r a r c h i n g d e t e r m i n a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e s h i f t i n g e v i d e n t i a r y b u r d e n s o f t h e

p a r t i e s

. A s w e e x p l a i n e d e a r l i e r

, A l l s t a t e p u t f o r w a r d s u f

f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e i n

s u p p o r t o f i t s m o t i o n f o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t t o e s t a b l i s h t h a t a l l w i n d

- c a u s e d

s t r u c t u r a l d a m a g e t o t h e B a y l e s ’ h o u s e w a s f u l l y c o m p e n s a t e d

. N o t o n l y d i d t h e

B a y l e s f a i l t o c o u n t e r w i t h a n y r e b u t t a l e v i d e n c e t o e s t a b l i s h t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a s

y e t u n c o m p e n s a t e d d a m a g e c a u s e d b y w i n d

, t h e B a y l e s a l s o f a i l e d t o p r o f f e r a n y

e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e q u a n t u m o f d a m a g e s t h e y h a d a l r e a d y r e c e i v e d f r o m A l l s t a t e

f o r w i n d

- c a u s e d d a m a g e w a s i n s u f f i c i e n t

. T h e B a y l e s h a v e c i t e d n o a u t h o r i t y

,

a n d w e h a v e f

o u n d n o n e

, t o s u p p o r t t h e p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t t h e s h i f t i n g e v i d e n t i a r y

b u r d e n o f p r o d u c t i o n i n t h e s e i n s u r a n c e s u i t s s o m e h o w a b s o l v e s t h e i n s u r e d s

f r o m t h e t r a d i t i o n a l r u l e “ [ u ] n d e r L o u i s i a n a l a w

, [ t h a t ] t h e p l a i n t i f f m u s t p r o v e

d a m a g e s w i t h r e a s o n a b l e c e r t a i n t y

. . . . ” A c c o r d i n g l y

, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t

, 4 1

c o r r e c t l y r u l e d t h a t t h e B a y l e s w e r e n o t e n t i t l e d t o a d d i t i o n a l p a y m e n t s f o r w i n d

d a m a g e u n d e r t h e i r h o m e o w n e r s p o l i c y

.

D

. S t a t u t o r y P e n a l t i e s u n d e r L a

. R

. S

. § § 2 2 : 1 2 2 0 a n d 2 2 : 6 5 8

doub le rec overy pr ohib i t i o n only exten ds to “all availabl e cover ages —an ins urer may not

benef it fr om off s e t s f

o r paym ents rec eived by the ins ured fr om the Unit ed Sta tes Sm all

B u s ines s Ass ocia tio n (S BA) or Road Ho me Progra m. ” Brad le y

, 606 F.3d at 22 9

, n

. 1 0

. Altho ugh the rec ord doe s not ref lect the det ails of the Bayles ’ sal e t o M u r p h y Oi l, it

pr es uma bly res ulte d fr om an att em pt to se ttl e any pot enti al tor t clai ms that res ide nts aff ect ed

by the oil that leak ed fr om the rup tur ed st orage tank er mi ght bring. We do not read Louis iana

law to ins tru ct that any suc h thir d- par ty “w indf all” (if enviro nme ntal contam inati on may be

so char act erize d) sho uld red ound to Alls tat e’s benef it as opp os ed to the benef it of the ins ured

.

Mo bil Expl ora tion & Produc ing U. S., Inc., v. Cajun Constr. Serv s.

, 45 F. 3d 96, 101 4 1

(5t h Cir. 1995) ; C O U C H O N I N S U R A N C E § 175: 9 (3r d ed. 200 6 ) ( “ It i s an ins ured 's burd en to

pr oduc e e viden ce that w ould af for d a r eas onable basis for es tim ating the amount of d ama ge

o r t h e pr opo rti onat e par t of dam age caus ed by the cover ed per il and that by the e x c l u d e d

per il. ")

.

2 1 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 21 Date Filed: 08/11/2010N o

. 0 9

- 3 0 1 6 1

B r e a c h o f c o n t r a c t i s a c o n d i t i o n p r e c e d e n t t o r e c o v e r y f o r t h e b r e a c h o f

t h e d u t y o f g o o d f a i t h

, a n d w e a g r e e w i t h t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t t h a t A l l s t a t e d i d n o t 4 2

b r e a c h i t s i n s u r a n c e c o n t r a c t w i t h t h e B a y l e s

. T h e r e f o r e

, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t

p r o p e r l y d e n i e d t h e B a y l e s ’ c l a i m f o r s t a t u t o r y p e n a l t i e s

.

I I I

. C O N C L U S I O N

A s t h e m o v a n t f

o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t

, A l l s t a t e h a d t h e b u r d e n o f p r o v i n g

t h e a p p l i c a b i l i t y o f a n y e x c l u s i o n f r o m c o v e r a g e

. A l l s t a t e p r o p e r l y s u p p o r t e d i t s

m o t i o n f

o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t w i t h s p e c i f i c e v i d e n c e ( i t s a d j u s t e r s ’ a n d e x p e r t ’ s

r e p o r t s

, a n d t h e B a y l e s ’ d e p o s i t i o n t e s t i m o n y ) t h a t a d d r e s s e d t h e v a r i o u s i t e m s

o f d a m a g e i n c u r r e d b y t h e B a y l e s ’ p r o p e r t y a n d t h e c a u s e o f e a c h i t e m ’ s

d a m a g e

, a s w e l l a s t h e p a r t i c u l a r a m o u n t s i t p a i d t o t h e B a y l e s f o r w i n d

- d a m a g e

t o t h o s e i t e m s

. A t t h a t j u n c t u r e

, t h e b u r d e n o f p r o d u c t i o n s h i f

t e d t o t h e B a y l e s

t o p u t f o r w a r d e v i d e n c e o f

s p e c i f i c f a c t s s u f

f i c i e n t t o d e m o n s t r a t e t h e e x i s t e n c e

o f u n c o m p e n s a t e d i t e m s o f d a m a g e t h a t w e r e c a u s e d b y w i n d

, o r o f a n y

d e f i c i e n c y i n i t s q u a n t u m o f t h e d a m a g e s p a i d b y A l l s t a t e t o i n d e m n i f y t h e

B a y l e s f

o r w i n d

- c a u s e d d a m a g e

. T h e y f a i l e d t o d o s o

. A s a l l o t h e r i s s u e s o n

a p p e a l a r e s u b s i d i a r y t o t h e s e d e t e r m i n a t i o n s

, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t ’ s g r a n t o f

A l l s t a t e ’ s m o t i o n f

o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t m u s t b e

, a n d h e r e b y i s

,

A F F I R M E D

.

Cla use n v. Fide li ty a nd D ep osi t Co. of M ar yla nd

, 660 So. 2d 83, 85-8 6 (La. App

. 1st 4 2

Cir. 199 5).

2 2 Case: 09-30161 Document: 00511200918 Page: 22 Date Filed: 08/11/2010