The mall owner claimed that Hanover wrongly denied coverage for its roof damage claim, stating that the damage was caused by turkey vulture nesting behavior or infestation.
The district court ruled in favor of Hanover in September. Mitchellville Plaza has appealed the decision, arguing that the lower court incorrectly ruled that the damage was caused by a turkey vulture infestation and therefore excluded from coverage.
Hanover has countered that the policy exclusion for nesting, infestation, or discharge of waste by birds applies, as the turkey vultures present on the property caused harm and damage in large enough numbers to be considered an infestation.
The insurer also stated that the term “infestation” is not ambiguous and the mall owner has failed to demonstrate that there is more than one reasonable interpretation of the term.
As the case proceeds, it will be important for the court to consider the specific language of the policy at issue and how it relates to the circumstances of the damage sustained by the strip mall.
