State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Bongen
Alaska Supreme Court
925 P.2d 1042 (1996)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
Jerome and Elizabeth Bongen (plaintiffs) owned a mountain home insured by State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (State Farm) (defendant). A mudslide destroyed the house after Kodiak Electric Association (defendant) clear-cut a right-of-way above the house, on City of Kodiak (defendant) property. State Farm denied the Bongens’ claim because their policy excluded losses caused by earth movement, including mudflow, even if another, covered cause also contributed to the loss. Specifically, the policy excluded any loss resulting from earth movement, regardless of what caused the earth movement, and regardless of “whether other causes acted concurrently or in any sequence with the excluded event to produce the loss.” The Bongens sued State Farm, the electric company, and the City of Kodiak. State Farm and the Bongens both requested partial summary judgment as to coverage. The Bongens argued that the policy covered the loss because the mudslide resulted from the city and electric company’s negligence, which was a covered event. The trial court granted the Bongens partial summary judgment, reasoning that the efficient-proximate-cause rule applied in Alaska multiple-causation insurance cases, and public policy prevented an insurance company from avoiding that rule through contractual language. State Farm appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Compton, C.J.)
Dissent (Matthews, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 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.