The Boughans' home was insured by a policy issued by Nationwide Insurance Company (Nationwide) at the time that they noticed a problem with their home. Their exterior brick walls were experiencing flaking. When they reported this to their insurer (over the phone) they were told that the type of loss was not covered by their homeowner policy. After contacting Nationwide several more times, an adjuster did come to their home and, again, told the Boughans that the loss was not covered. Later the insurer sent a written denial of coverage.

Roughly a year after receiving the written denial (and after finding coverage with another insurer) the Boughans hired a contractor to repair the damaged brickwork. Later, they reported some structural problems to their new company, Erie Insurance Company (Erie). An inspector sent to inspect their home concluded that the damage found in their flooring, joists and other areas resulted from the previous seepage of water through the, now repaired, brickwork. Since the damage occurred prior to their policy period, Erie denied coverage. The Boughans claimed that they again requested coverage from Nationwide. They sued their prior insurer after having their coverage request turned down again. Nationwide was sued for dealing with the Broughans in bad faith and for not responding to the expense of repairing the damaged brickwork.

Editor's note: The Broughans' complaint also included allegations regarding a request for auto coverage and a life insurance policy, but those issues are irrelevant to this case.

Nationwide responded to the suit by requesting a summary judgment, declaring that no coverage obligation existed due to the loss being excluded. Nationwide's motion was granted and the Broughans appealed. The higher court reviewed the exclusions (in their basic policy and in an amendatory endorsement) that Nationwide relied upon for denying coverage. The court did not find the language to be subject to ambiguity. The higher court agreed with Nationwide and with the findings of the trial court. The policy specifically excluded coverage for the type of damage to the Broughans' home. Since, in its opinion, the type of loss was ineligible for coverage, the bad faith allegation was found to be without merit. The lower court decision in favor of the insurer was affirmed.

Jennifer Boughan, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Nationwide Property and Casualty Company, Defendant-Appellee. Ohio Court of Appeals. Case No. 1-04-57. January 24, 2005. Affirmed. 2005 CCH Personal and Commercial Liability Cases. Paragraph 1062.

CCH Personal and Commercial Liability Cases. Paragraph 16006