{"id":435,"date":"2022-04-16T09:54:12","date_gmt":"2022-04-16T13:54:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/?p=435"},"modified":"2023-11-29T16:49:48","modified_gmt":"2023-11-29T20:49:48","slug":"coverage-was-not-in-the-cards-for-circus-circus-casino-holds-ninth-circuit","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/2022\/04\/16\/coverage-was-not-in-the-cards-for-circus-circus-casino-holds-ninth-circuit\/","title":{"rendered":"Coverage Was Not In the Cards for Circus Circus Casino, Holds Ninth Circuit"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>By\u00a0<\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/www.duanemorris.com\/attorneys\/maxhstern.html\"><strong>Max H. Stern<\/strong><\/a><strong>\u00a0and\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Holden Benon<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Yesterday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a succinct but well-reasoned decision that there was no coverage for a Las Vegas Hotel &amp; Casino\u2019s COVID-19-related business interruption loss under the coverage provided by an \u201call risks\u201d insurance policy. See <em>Circus Circus LV, LP v. AIG Specialty Ins. Co.<\/em>, No. 21-15367 (9th Cir. Apr. 15, 2022). <a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/12\/2022\/04\/vegas.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-436 alignright\" src=\"http:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/12\/2022\/04\/vegas-300x200.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"200\" srcset=\"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/12\/2022\/04\/vegas-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/12\/2022\/04\/vegas-1024x683.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/12\/2022\/04\/vegas-768x513.jpg 768w, https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/12\/2022\/04\/vegas.jpg 1254w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Even though Nevada law governed the analysis, the court\u2019s written opinion leaned heavily on appellate authorities that applied California law (in particular, the California Court of Appeal\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/2021\/11\/19\/yet-another-win-for-insurers-on-covid-19-business-interruption-claims-the-inns-by-the-sea-california-court-of-appeal-decision\/\"><em>Inns-by-the-Sea<\/em> decision<\/a> and the Ninth Circuit\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/2021\/12\/28\/carriers-enjoy-unanimous-success-in-recent-wave-of-covid-19-business-interruption-decisions-in-federal-appeals\/\"><em>Mudpie<\/em> decision<\/a>).\u00a0 The <em>Circus Circus<\/em> court followed the <em>Inns-by-the-Sea <\/em>causation analysis in holding that, despite Circus Circus\u2019 allegation that the coronavirus was present on its premises, it failed to identify any direct physical damage to its property caused by the virus which led to the Casino\u2019s closure. \u201cRather,\u201d the court observed, \u201cthe allegations surrounding Circus Circus\u2019s closure are based on the local Stay at Home Orders.\u201d\u00a0 Citing <em>Mudpie<\/em>, the court also held that Circus Circus failed to allege it suffered a direct physical loss of its property, reasoning the loss must be due to a \u201cdistinct demonstrable, physical alteration of the property.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The\u00a0 <em>Circus Circus <\/em>decision adds to the line of appellate authorities that have adhered to the same reasoning articulated in the initial COVID-19 appellate decisions that came down last year.\u00a0 In the cases that are still currently pending, the odds certainly seem to favor the carriers.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>By\u00a0Max H. Stern\u00a0and\u00a0Holden Benon Yesterday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a succinct but well-reasoned decision that there was no coverage for a Las Vegas Hotel &amp; Casino\u2019s COVID-19-related business interruption loss under the coverage provided by an \u201call risks\u201d insurance policy. See Circus Circus LV, LP v. AIG Specialty &hellip; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/2022\/04\/16\/coverage-was-not-in-the-cards-for-circus-circus-casino-holds-ninth-circuit\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;Coverage Was Not In the Cards for Circus Circus Casino, Holds Ninth Circuit&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"ppma_author":[417,413],"class_list":["post-435","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general"],"authors":[{"term_id":417,"user_id":6,"is_guest":0,"slug":"duanemorris3","display_name":"Duane Morris","avatar_url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/843ff6e7a8fe5fc92109b47a45f34b6cf0ea499e6e788db23456c838b0ae6747?s=96&d=blank&r=g","0":null,"1":"","2":"","3":"","4":"","5":"","6":"","7":"","8":""},{"term_id":413,"user_id":6,"is_guest":0,"slug":"duanemorris3","display_name":"Max H. Stern","avatar_url":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/12\/2024\/12\/sternmax-100x100.jpg","0":null,"1":"","2":"","3":"","4":"","5":"","6":"","7":"","8":""}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/435","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=435"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/435\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=435"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=435"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=435"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/insurancelaw\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ppma_author?post=435"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}