Carter Lake v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
604 F.2d 1052 (1979)
- Written by Noah Lewis, JD
Facts
William and Kesano Mecseji owned a home in Carter Lake, Iowa. In February 1975, the Mecsejis’ basement flooded with raw sewage because the city’s sewage pump overloaded and shut off. City of Carter Lake (plaintiff) personnel reset the pump, and the basement drained. William filed a claim against the city for $418.12. The city submitted the claim under its comprehensive general liability policy with Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. (Aetna) (defendant). The policy covered property damage caused by “an occurrence,” meaning that Aetna would cover the city’s liability for property damage caused by an accident, including continuous or repeated exposure to conditions that resulted in property damage that the city neither expected nor intended. Aetna initially denied the claim because the city had not been found negligent. Following identical failures of the sewage pump, the Mecsejis’ basement flooded five more times. The Mecsejis sued the city for negligence. In February 1976, Aetna notified the city that it would defend the city but would not pay for any damages after the first flooding. A jury awarded the Mecsejis $11,404.14. The city then sued Aetna to recover under the policy. The district court held the policy covered only the first sewage backup. The city appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Stephenson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 834,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
