Pursuant to 5 th Cir. R . 47 .5, th e co urt has determined that this op in io n should not * be publishe d and is not precede nt except und er the limit ed circu mstance s set forth in 5thC ir. R. 47.5 .4. This court granted l eave toapp ealfrom the district co urt’s order denyin g Balbo a’s 1 motionfor summaryj udgment, ente red on October14 , 20 08, and t he district court’s or der denying B alb oa’s motionfor recon siderationunder Rule 59(e), entered on November25 , 20 08. Bec auseB alb oa did not se ek ju dicial review of its Rule 59(e) motionbefore this court, we will n otc on si de r th at is su e. “An a pp ellant ab a n do n s alli ssu esnotr ais edan d argu edinits init ial brief onapp eal .” Cinel v. Con nick , 1 5F .3 d 1 3 3 8 , 1 3 4 5( 5 thC ir

. 1 9 9 4) (cit ation s o mitt ed). 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 09- 60036

D E N N IS D O U Z A R T ; F A IT H S E A W R IG H T , P la in tiffs - A p p e lle e s , v. B A L B O AIN S U R A N C E C O M P A N Y , D e fe n d a n t - A p p e lla n t
.

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f o rt he So ut he r n Di s t r i c t o f M i s s i s s i ppi U SD C N o. 1: 07- C V

- 1057

B ef ore B E N AV ID E S , D E N N IS, an d E L R O D , C i rcui t Ju dg es . P E R C U R I A M: * B al boa Insuran ce C om pa n y ( B al boa) appea l s t h e di st ri ctcourt ’ s den i alof i t s m o t i o n f

o rs um m ar y j udg m e n t und e r 2 8 U
. S. C. § 1 29 2(b)

. I n i t s m o t i o n, 1 B a lb o a a ss e rte d th a t th e d a m a g e to D e n n is D o u z a rt a n d F a ith S e a w ri g h t ’s United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D Februar y 26, 2010 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I Clerk Case: 09-60036 Document: 00511036988 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/26/2010N o. 09- 60036

2 ( D ou zart s) hom e caused by H u rri can e K atr i n a w as not c overed u n der t h e B al boa pol i cy becau se t h e dam age to t h ei r hom e resul t ed f rom an excl u ded peri lun der t he po l i c y– w i nds t o r m da m ag e –r at he r t han an e xp l o s i o n, w hi c h i s no t e xc l ude d. In response to B al boa’ s m ot i on f or sum m ary j u dg m en t , t h e D ou zart s s u pp ort ed t he i ra s s e r t i o n t hatda m ag e t o t he i r ho m e w as ca us e d byan ex pl o s i o n r e s ul t i ng f r om t he ac c um ul at i on o f ai ri nsi de t hei r h om e dur i ng t he hurr i c ane w i t h an af f i davi tf r om D r . N ei l B
. H al l

. D r . H al l c onc l uded t hat “ t o t r i gge r pr ogr es sive fa ilu r e a n d th e co m p le te d e s tr u c tio n o f th e b u ild in gd u e to h u r r ic a n e w in d , it is
m ostl i kely t h at s om e porti on of t h e bu i l di n g di d ‘ exp l ode’ i n a m att er of sec on ds, fo llo w e d b y th e p r o g r e s s iv e fa ilu r e o f th e s tr u c tu r e .” T h e di st ri ctcourtf

o u n d th a t “t h ere i s a genu i n e i ssue of m ater i alfact
r e ga r di ng w he t he rt he [ D o uz ar t s ] a r e en t i t l e d t o c o ve r ag e und e r t he ho m e o w ne r ’ s i ns ur anc e po l i c y i s s ue d t o t he m b y Bal bo a” a nd “ t hata g e nui ne i ssue of m ater i alfactexi st s r egard i n g w h et h er B al boa h ad an argu able or l e gi t i m at e b as i s f

o rde nyi ng t he [ D o uz ar t s ’ ] c l ai m . ” M o r e pa r t i c ul ar l y, t he di st ri ctcourtcon cl u ded t h at D r. H al l ’ s t est i m on y “ creat es a genu i n e i ssue of
m a t e r ia l fa c tr e g a r d in gw h e t h e r a ll o r p a r t o f t h e d a m a g e to th e [D o u z a r t s ’] ho m e w as c aus e d b y an e xp l o s i o n t hatre s ul t e d f r o m a w i nds t o r m . ” I n r e ac hi ng i t s co nc l u s i o n , t h e d i s t r i c tc o u r t n o t e d t h a t Ba l b o a h a s n o t s u b m i t t e d a ny ev i d en ce th a t i t actu a l l y in sp ected the D ou za rts’h om e ev en after the D ou za rts i n f orm ed B al boa tha ti t s adj u st er h ad i n spect ed t h e w rong hou se. F u rt h erm ore, B al boa h as fai l ed to produ ce i t s ow n expert reportor an y ot h er evi den ce c on t rary t o D r. H al l ’ s c on cl u si on s. Ac c o r d i n gl y, w e a f

f i r m t he j udg m e nto f

t he di s t r i c t c o ur t e s s e nt i al l y f o rt he reasons st ated i n the di st ri ctcou rt ’ s caref u la n d thoroug h order, dated O ct ober 1 4 , 2 0 0 8 , d e n y i n gB a l b o a ’ s mo t i o n f o r s u mm a r y j u d g me n t
. A F F I RMED. Case: 09-60036 Document: 00511036988 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/26/2010