United States District Court, D. Connecticut
RULING AND ORDER ON MOTION TO COMPEL APPRAISAL AND
A. BOLDEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Cube Building, LLC (“Plaintiff”) has sued
Scottsdale Insurance Group (“Scottsdale” or
“Defendant”) for breach of a contract of
Cube Building moves to compel appraisal of Ice Cube
Building's alleged losses and to stay this case until
appraisal has concluded.
reasons that follow, the Court DENIES the
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Cube Building allegedly owns real property in Groton,
Connecticut. Notice of Removal, Ex. 1
(“Complaint” ¶ 1); ECF No. 1. Scottsdale,
allegedly an Arizona insurance company, is authorized to do
business within the State of Connecticut. Id. ¶
13. The issue is whether Scottsdale, under the operative
insurance policy (the “Policy”), is under a legal
duty to cover damage to Ice Cube Building's property.
January 8, 2016, Scottsdale allegedly issued the Policy to
Ice Cube Building for coverage of real property in Groton,
Connecticut. Pl. Mot. Compel ¶ 1, ECF No. 21; Notice of
Removal, Compl. ¶ 3. The Policy allegedly includes
commercial property coverage with a limit of $2, 603, 669
(the agreed value) for the property, limited coverage for
fungus, wet rot, dry rot, and bacteria with limits of $15,
000 and a $5, 000 deductible. Answer and Countercl.
¶¶ 6-7, ECF No. 9.
Policy allegedly contains an appraisal clause that states:
If we and you disagree on the value of the property or the
amount of loss, either may make a written demand for an
appraisal of the loss. In this event, each party will select
a competent and impartial appraiser. The two appraisers will
select an umpire. If they cannot agree, either may request
that selection be made by a judge of a court having
Pl.'s Mot. Compel ¶ 2.
the Policy was allegedly operative, a snow or ice storm
allegedly caused damage to Ice Cube Building's property.
Notice of Removal, Compl. ¶ 4. The weight of snow and
ice allegedly caused the roof to begin to leak and for water
to come into the building. Answer and Countercl. ¶ 9.
3, 2016, Ice Cube Building allegedly notified Scottsdale of
the claim. Id. ¶ 9. Scottsdale allegedly
acknowledged the claim, and, following an investigation,
Scottsdale allegedly issued a position letter that accepted
coverage in part and denied coverage in part. Id.
¶¶ 10-11. Scottsdale maintains that it paid Ice
Cube Building for the undisputed amount of damages arising
out of the claim covered by the Policy. Id. ¶
12. It also maintains Ice Cube Building submitted its own
estimate of damages in excess of $1 million dollars that Ice
Cube Building contends arise from the claimed damage to its
property. Id. ¶ 13.