Michael F. Schmidt And Nate Peplinski Obtain Dismissal Of Claim For Property Damage Insurance Benefits

In Suleiman v Depositors Insurance Company, the plaintiff sought recovery of alleged damages incurred to a house insured by a homeowners policy issued by Depositors. After discovery we filed a motion for summary disposition on the basis that the plaintiff did not own the property at the time she applied for the policy of insurance, the plaintiff did not have insurable interest in the property at the time of the application for insurance, the plaintiff failed to comply with the policy terms and conditions because she was not living at the premises as required by the policy, the house could not meet the policy definitions of a “residence premises” which requires that the house be lived in for insurance coverage, and the plaintiff also violated the dwelling condition of the policy, which required that the house be only used for dwelling purposes. We further argued that plaintiff violated the terms and conditions of the policy by failing to cooperate and failed to provide documents requested in the investigation. We also filed discovery motions due to the plaintiff’s failure to comply with discovery. The case was dismissed by the court.