Travco Insurance Company v. Larry Ward

504 F. App'x 251
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 15, 2013
Docket10-1710
StatusUnpublished
Cited by24 cases

This text of 504 F. App'x 251 (Travco Insurance Company v. Larry Ward) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Travco Insurance Company v. Larry Ward, 504 F. App'x 251 (4th Cir. 2013).

Opinion

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Larry Ward appeals from an order granting summary judgment in favor of Travco Insurance Company and declaring that he is not entitled to coverage under his homeowners insurance policy for alleged drywall-related damages to his home. The district court found that four provisions of the policy excluded coverage. Previously, we certified the following question of Virginia law to the Supreme Court of Virginia:

For purposes of interpreting an “all risk” homeowners insurance policy, is any damage resulting from this drywall unambiguously excluded from coverage under the policy because it is loss caused by:
(a) “mechanical breakdown, latent defect, inherent vice, or any quality in property that causes it to damage itself’;
(b) “faulty, inadequate, or defective materials”;
(c) “rust or other corrosion”; or
(d) “pollutants,” where pollutant is defined as “any solid, liquid, gaseous or thermal irritant or contaminant, including smoke, vapor, soot, fumes, acids, al-kalis, chemicals and waste?”

Travco Ins. Co. v. Ward, 468 Fed.Appx. 195, 195-96 (4th Cir.2012).

*253 The Supreme Court of Virginia has now answered all subparts of the certified question in the affirmative. TravCo Ins. Co. v. Ward, 736 S.E.2d 321 (Va. Nov. 1, 2012) (2012 WL 5358705). The parties agree, and we find, that the court’s answers warrant affirmance of the judgment. Accordingly, we affirm.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Tapestry, Inc. v. Factory Mut. Insurance
Court of Appeals of Maryland, 2022
Neuro-Communication Servs. v. Cincinnati Ins. Co.
2022 Ohio 4379 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2022)
Appalachian Regional Healthcare v. Cunningham
806 S.E.2d 380 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 2017)
Taja Investments LLC v. Peerless Insurance Co.
196 F. Supp. 3d 587 (E.D. Virginia, 2016)
Mellin v. Northern Security Insurance
115 A.3d 799 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 2015)
Ardente v. Standard Fire Insurance Co.
744 F.3d 815 (First Circuit, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
504 F. App'x 251, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/travco-insurance-company-v-larry-ward-ca4-2013.