Federal Court Affirms Dismissal of Hail Damage Claim Due to Uncertain Loss Date

Cutchall v. Chubb Lloyds Insurance Company case highlights importance of establishing specific storm date for coverage

Published on Mar. 9, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A federal appellate court has affirmed the dismissal of a hail damage claim against Chubb Lloyds Insurance Company, ruling that the policyholders failed to provide a stable, supported, and defensible theory of when the loss-causing hailstorm occurred at their Houston-area home. The court found that without a clear determination of the specific loss date within the policy period, the insureds could not establish coverage for the claimed interior water damage, ending the case before reaching other coverage issues.

Why it matters

This case underscores the critical importance for policyholders to thoroughly investigate and conclusively determine the date of a loss-causing weather event, such as a hailstorm, before filing an insurance claim or lawsuit. Failing to establish the specific loss date can be a fatal flaw, preventing the policyholder from meeting their initial burden to prove a covered loss occurred during the policy period.

The details

The Cutchalls claimed their Houston home suffered interior water damage after a hailstorm breached the roof, but over the course of the claim and litigation, multiple potential storm dates were identified, ranging from March 2021 to August 2023. The trial court granted summary judgment to Chubb, finding the insureds failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact that a hailstorm capable of causing the alleged damage occurred during the policy period. On appeal, the Fifth Circuit affirmed, concluding that under Texas law, the insureds bore the initial burden to prove a covered loss happened within the policy period, which they failed to do given the shifting and unsupported theories of the loss date.

  • Multiple potential storm dates were identified, ranging from March 2021 to August 2023.
  • The original petition alleged the loss occurred on September 7, 2021.
  • In response to summary judgment, a new affidavit asserted June 15, 2021 as the operative date.

The players

Cutchalls

Policyholders who filed the insurance claim and lawsuit against Chubb Lloyds Insurance Company.

Chubb Lloyds Insurance Company of Texas

The insurance company that denied the Cutchalls' hail damage claim.

Meteorologist

An expert witness for Chubb who opined there were no reports of hail in the area on certain claimed loss dates.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“The problem was not simply that there were different dates. The problem was that there was no stable, supported, defensible theory of loss tied to a specific event at the insured property during the policy period.”

— Chip Merlin, Author (propertyinsurancecoveragelaw.com)

“Importantly, the appellate court did not even reach the concurrent causation arguments. It did not analyze wear and tear versus storm damage. It did not evaluate segregation of damages. It did not delve into bad faith.”

— Chip Merlin, Author (propertyinsurancecoveragelaw.com)

What’s next

The judge in the case will decide on Tuesday whether or not to allow the Cutchalls to file a late affidavit asserting yet another potential storm date.

The takeaway

This case serves as a stark reminder that policyholders must thoroughly investigate and conclusively establish the specific date of a loss-causing weather event, such as a hailstorm, before filing an insurance claim or lawsuit. Failing to do so can be a fatal flaw that prevents the policyholder from meeting their initial burden to prove a covered loss occurred during the policy period, ending the case before other coverage issues are even considered.