Insurance – Policy Coverage – Golf Course Flooding – Dam v. Retaining Wall
By Deborah Elkins
Published: April 28, 2009
A dirt-bolstered concrete retaining wall that holds water to irrigate a golf course may have been a “dam” with no insurance coverage, or a covered “retaining wall,” and a Richmond U.S. District Court denies a carrier summary judgment on the golf course’s claim for damage from Tropical Storm Ernesto.
Piankatank River Golf Club Inc v. Selective Insurance Co. (USDC-ED) (VLW 009-3-233) (21 pp.)
![[Print]](http://valawyersweekly.com/wp-content/plugins/dmc_sociable_toolbar/print.png)
![[Email]](http://valawyersweekly.com/wp-content/plugins/dmc_sociable_toolbar/email_2.png)
![[RSS Feed]](http://valawyersweekly.com/wp-content/plugins/dmc_sociable_toolbar/rssfeed.png)
![[del.icio.us]](http://valawyersweekly.com/wp-content/plugins/dmc_sociable_toolbar/delicious.png)
![[Facebook]](http://valawyersweekly.com/wp-content/plugins/dmc_sociable_toolbar/facebook.png)
© Copyright 2012 Virginia Lawyers Media. All Rights Reserved.
VLW Verdicts & Settlements
Refine your search for VLW Verdict & Settlement Reports or send us your case results for publication. Database search feature available to VLW subscribers only - login required.
Log in to search the V & S Database
Submit a Verdicts & Settlements Report
 |
GET THE VLW DAILY ALERT
The Daily Alert from Virginia Lawyers Weekly brings you the latest legal news every morning in your e-mail. You’ll get headline news, a link to the day’s Top Opinion and more!
Click here to sign up for the Alert
STAY CONNECTED WITH VLW
Stay up-to-date with the latest news and information from Virginia Lawyers Weekly by subscribing to our RSS feeds and visiting our social media pages.
POST A COMMENT