Multiple Causes of Loss

1) Doctrines to be Discussed
a) efficient proximate cause
b) concurrent cause
2) Policy Provisions
a) anti-concurrent cause
b) ensuing and resulting loss
3) Claims Handling Approaches
4) Jurisdictions, Facts, and Policy Language
5) Multiple Cause Example
6) Facts Triggering Multiple Cause Analysis
7) Multiple Causes v. Characterizations
a) mold v. vandalism
b) e.g. corrosion = water damage?
c) e.g. faulty workmanship = contractor negligence?
8) Recap
9) Quiz – Reinforcing Part 1 Materials
a) 5 multiple choice questions
b) 4 choices per question
c) A second quiz if less than 80% score on first quiz

1) All Risk Coverage and Causation
2) Proximate Cause
a) General Rule
b) Court Definition
c) Other Names
d) As a Fact Issue
3) Proximate Cause – Initial Cause
a) Sets in motion
b) extra weight?
c) first cause more important?
4) Efficient Proximate Cause Concepts
a) quality of the links
b) most important cause
c) ignore remote causes
d) determine intent of parties
5) Garvey Case
6) Murray Case
7) Recap
8) Quiz – Reinforcing Part 2 materials
a) 5 multiple choice questions
b) 4 choices per question
c) A second quiz if less than 80% score on first quiz

1) Concurrent Causation
a) definition
b) “but for” test
c) illustration
2) Spece v. Erie
a) water floods basement thru sump
b) policy excludes backup through sump
c) lightning damage off premises
d) power failure issues
e) Court finds coverage
3) Sequential Causation Approach
a) distinguishes sequence from concurrent causes
b) emphasis is placed on first or last cause in chain of events
c) courts looking for coverage
4) Train of Events Test
a) Followed in Massachusetts/
b) similar to efficient proximate case approach
c) focus is on an initiating cause of loss
5) Anti-concurrent Causation Clause
a) typical language
b) add certainty to contract
c) avoid jury/fact finder uncertainty
6) ACC example
a) flood
b) sewer backup
c) holding
7) Recap
8) Quiz – Reinforcing Part 3 materials
a) 5 multiple choice questions
b) 4 choices per question
c) A second quiz if less than 80% score on first quiz

1) Anti-concurrent Cause Clauses Applied
a) Front Row Theater example
i) rain water
ii) sewer backup
b) TNT Speed & Sport Center example
i) river flooded
ii) vandal removed sandbags from levy
2) ACC Majority and Minority Rules
a) Majority Rule
b) Minority Rule
3) ACC and Contributory Apportionment
a) Example: weight of snow v. decay of roof truss
b) Holding: No apportionment based on cause
4) Hurricane Losses and ACC
a) general rule
b) separating windstorm damage
c) Corbin case
5) Recap
6) Quiz – Reinforcing Part 4 materials
a) 5 multiple choice questions
b) 4 choices per question
c) A second quiz if less than 80% score on first quiz

1) Introduction
a) broad- all risk ensuing language
b) narrow -named peril ensuing loss
2) Purpose – Resulting Losses
3) Fire Example
4) Uncovered Initial Event and Coverage
a) definition
b) Venn diagram
5) Schloss Example
a) EIFS
b) faulty work
c) mold/rot
6) LaQuila Example
a) concrete on fifth floor was below specs
b) needed to be removed
c) builders risk policy
7) Narrow Interpretation – Separate event
a) Intro
b) Acme Galvanizing- molten zinc
c) Alwart – EIFS
d) Lilliard Roberts – improper flashing – wind driven rain
8) Recap
9) Quiz – Reinforcing Part 5 materials
a) 5 multiple choice questions
b) 4 choices per question
c) A second quiz if less than 80% score on first quiz

1) Broad Interpretation Example
a) lining for concrete sewer pipe
b) defective catalyst
c) damaged lining and obstructed pipe
d) held- ensuing loss – despite no separate ensuing cause
2) Narob Development v. Ins. Co.
a) defective retaining wall collapsed
b) didn’t damage other property when falling
c) in dicta, court mentioned “collateral damage”
d) dicta used by others to support coverage for collateral damage
3) Blaine Construction
a) Faulty Roof
b) water damage in roof insulation
c) held – water damage covered
d) collateral damage within defective roof system
4) Analysis Framework
a) identify faulty work and excluded items
b) identify ensuing damage/loss
c) identify covered cause for ensuing damage
5) Practical Tips
a) review policy language
i) anti-concurrent causation language
ii) ensuing loss provisions
b) know your jurisdiction’s approach to causation
c) try to be conscientious in communications
d) don’t force experts to use language that isn’t theirs
6) Course Conclusion/Wrap Up
7) Recap
8) Quiz – Reinforcing Part 6 materials
a) 5 multiple choice questions
b) 4 choices per question
c) A second quiz if less than 80% score on first quiz