FACTUAL DISPUTE ON ORIGIN OF PLUMBING LEAK REVERSES INSURER’S SUMMARY JUDGMENT
In a recently decided residential plumbing leak case, the crucial coverage question was whether a plumbing leak originated below the slab, which would trigger a $5,000 coverage sublimit, or above the slab, which made the entire policy limit of over $600,000 available. In Piot v. Allstate Veh. & Prop. Ins. Co., No. 02-21-00335-CV, 2022 WL 3273600 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Aug. 11, 2022, no pet. h.) (slip op.), Allstate’s sole evidence in support of its summary judgment was a report from the leak detection consultant stating the leak originated below the slab. The Piots did not offer their own evidence, but impeached Allstate’s evidence, eliciting testimony that cast doubt on what the inspector had done to verify that the leak actually originated below the slab. The court of appeals held that given the burdens of proof on a motion for summary judgment, the Piots had created a fact issue sufficient to preclude summary judgment for the insurer and reversed summary judgment in favor of the insurer and remanded the case for trial.