In COVID-19 Business Interruption Case, Court Finds Plaintiffs Did Not Argue Physical Loss and Virus Exemption Applies

BVLaw
Court Case Digests
November 25, 2020

Access the Full Article

This article is available with a subscription to any of these products:
It is also available in this product:
Already a subscriber or product owner?  Login
This article is also available for purchase. (698 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
5712 Furniture Stores
442110 Furniture Stores
economic damages & lost profits
damages, lost profits, insurance, business interruption loss, coronavirus, COVID-19, business interruption, physical loss
AFM Mattress Co. v. Motorists Commercial Mutual Insurance Company
2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 221121
US
Federal Court
Illinois
United States District Court
N/A
Shah

Summary

In this business interruption case resulting from mandatory shutdowns to control COVID-19, the court grants a motion to dismiss claims of plaintiff. While plaintiff claims losses due to COVID-19, it does not sufficiently move the court to consider the virus exclusion of the policy inapplicable. A motion for a sur-response to espouse an alternative theory was also denied but without prejudice.

See Also

AFM Mattress Co. v. Motorists Commercial Mutual Insurance Company

Full Text of Court Cases
November 25, 2020

In this business interruption case resulting from mandatory shutdowns to control COVID-19, the court grants a motion to dismiss claims of plaintiff. While plaintiff claims losses due to COVID-19, it does not sufficiently move the court to consider the virus exclusion of the policy inapplicable. A motion for a sur-response to espouse an alternative theory was also denied but without prejudice.

This article also appears in:
Business Valuation UpdateVol. 27 No. 4
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, Seventh Edition