Russell v. NGM Insurance Company

176 A.3d 196 (2017)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Russell v. NGM Insurance Company

New Hampshire Supreme Court
176 A.3d 196 (2017)

  • Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Play video

Facts

Michelle and Robert Russell (plaintiffs) discovered moisture and mold in their attic that resulted from faulty workmanship, including ventilation and insulation defects. The Russells moved out of their home for almost a year while the mold was eradicated, and they submitted a loss-of-use claim under their homeowners’ insurance policy. NGM Insurance Company (NGM) (defendant) denied the claim on the ground that the policy covered mold only if caused by an insured-against peril, and covered perils specifically excluded faulty workmanship. The mold endorsement excluded losses from constant or repeated water damage unless such damage was completely hidden so that the insureds did not know about it. However, the policy also contained an ensuing-loss clause that provided an exception to coverage exclusions if an excluded peril was part of a chain of events that damaged the property. The Russells sued for a declaratory judgment, arguing that the hidden water seepage and mold were ensuing losses resulting from the faulty workmanship. The court found the policy did not cover the loss and granted NGM summary judgment. The Russells appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Dalianis, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership