“Contemplated” Is Not “Conveyed”: The Fifth Circuit Clarifies Conditional Assignments of Post-Loss Insurance Rights in Navarre v. AIG Property Casualty (2025)

1. Introduction

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in Navarre v. AIG Property Casualty Company, No. 24-30639 (Decided 10 July 2025), addressed the pivotal question of whether a purchaser of real property acquired standing to pursue the seller’s unfinished hurricane-loss insurance claims under a homeowner’s policy by virtue of contract language that merely anticipated a later “Assignment & Power of Attorney.”

The case pits appellant–plaintiff William G. Navarre, the buyer of a storm-damaged residence in Lake Charles, Louisiana, against appellee–defendant AIG Property Casualty Company (“AIG”), the insurer under the sellers’ policy. Navarre sued for additional benefits, asserting that he became the assignee of all post-loss insurance rights at or before the June 30 2021 closing. AIG countered that any effective assignment did not materialize until January 3 2023—well after Navarre filed suit and after the contractual two-year prescriptive period had tolled.

The district court granted summary judgment for AIG; the Fifth Circuit affirmed, holding that (1) conditional or “contemplated” assignments do not transfer rights until the suspensive condition—here, execution of a separate assignment document—occurs, and (2) a post-loss assignment executed after prescription cannot retroactively cure lack of standing.

2. Summary of the Judgment

Lack of Standing: At the time suit was filed (23 June 2022), Navarre had no real and actual interest in the insurance claim because no assignment had yet been executed.
Conditional Language: Both Addendum A and the Side Letter merely promised to create an “Assignment & Power of Attorney” later; they did not themselves effect a present transfer of rights.
Prescription (Limitations): Once the formal Assignment was at last executed (3 Jan 2023), the two-year contractual and statutory prescriptive periods—running from the 2020 hurricane dates—had expired; therefore, the claims were time-barred.
Affirmance: The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of AIG.

3. Detailed Analysis

3.1 Precedents Cited and Their Influence

TCC Contractors, Inc. v. Hospital Service District No. 3, 52 So.3d 1103 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2010)
The Louisiana First Circuit held that an assignee who files suit before acquiring rights has no standing, and subsequent execution of an assignment cannot relate back to cure the defect once prescription has run. The Fifth Circuit relied heavily on TCC to reject Navarre’s “retroactive cure” argument.
Producing Manager’s Co. v. Broadway Theater League, 288 So.2d 676 (La. 1974)
Reaffirmed that only a party with a “real and actual interest” may sue. This principle underpins the standing analysis.
Kelly v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 169 So.3d 328 (La. 2015)
Recognized that post-loss insurance rights can be assigned, but subject to ordinary contract and prescription rules. Cited to show assignments are permissible yet conditioned by procedure.
Campbell v. Melton, 817 So.2d 69 (La. 2002) & La. Civ. Code art. 1767
Defined suspensive conditions—obligations that take effect only upon occurrence of an uncertain event. The court used these authorities to characterize the unexecuted Assignment clause as suspensive.
Prejean v. Guillory, 38 So.3d 274 (La. 2010) & La. Civ. Code art. 2046
Stood for the rule that when contract language is clear, courts may not look beyond the four corners or rely on parol evidence to divine intent.
Other cites (Wiley, Naquin, etc.) aided procedural framing, but the above cases decisively shaped the outcome.

3.2 The Court’s Legal Reasoning

Contract Interpretation.
Using Louisiana’s civilian methodology, the court read the buy-sell agreement, Addendum A, and the Side Letter as a unified contract. The plain wording showed that the parties intended to execute a future “Assignment & Power of Attorney.” Phrases such as “will contain an assignment” and “will execute” signaled futurity, not immediacy. The inclusion of an indented draft assignment did not override the clear conditional language.
Suspensive Condition.
Because the assignment hinged on creation and execution of a separate instrument, the obligation to transfer rights was subject to a suspensive condition. Until that condition occurred (3 Jan 2023), the sellers retained all rights.
Standing at Filing.
Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 681 and Producing Manager’s require a plaintiff to possess a right of action at filing. Navarre, lacking an executed assignment, had none.
Prescription Cannot Be Revived.
The contractual policy language and La. R.S. § 22:868 fixed a two-year limitation. An after-acquired assignment cannot relate back and “bootstrap” an extinguished right (TCC Contractors).
Parol Evidence Barred.
Because the documents were unambiguous, Louisiana civilian principles excluded extrinsic or parol evidence of supposed intent. Navarre’s reliance on “whereas” clauses and surrounding circumstances could not supplant the contractual text.

3.3 Impact on Future Litigation and Insurance Practice

Heightened Drafting Precision: Parties selling damaged property must employ present-tense, operative language (“hereby assign and transfer”) if they intend an immediate conveyance of insurance claims.
Transactional Due Diligence: Purchasers should confirm that any contemplated assignment is fully executed before filing suit, or risk dismissal for want of standing and the loss of claims to prescription.
Insurer Defenses Strengthened: Insurers now have appellate precedent to argue that conditional contractual language does not effectuate assignment, providing an early summary-judgment avenue.
Circuit Guidance Harmonization: The Fifth Circuit’s approach aligns with Louisiana intermediate appellate courts (TCC) and augments federal diversity jurisprudence, reducing forum variability.
Potential Spill-over Beyond Insurance: Any assignment of contractual rights—royalties, indemnities, warranties—conditioned on future documentation risks similar fate if the trigger document is delayed.

4. Complex Concepts Simplified

Assignment of Rights: The legal transfer of a right (e.g., to payment) from one party (assignor) to another (assignee). Post-loss insurance benefits are generally assignable unless prohibited.
Post-Loss Insurance Rights: Benefits and causes of action that arise after an insured peril occurs. Distinct from pre-loss policy rights.
Suspensive Condition: A contractual condition that suspends performance until an uncertain event occurs (La. Civ. Code art. 1767). No rights pass until the condition is fulfilled.
Parol Evidence Rule (Civilian Form): When a written contract is clear, courts cannot consider outside statements or writings to vary its meaning (La. Civ. Code art. 2046).
Prescription (Statute of Limitations): The period within which a legal action must be filed. In Louisiana first-party insurance claims, two years unless the policy affords more time (La. R.S. § 22:868).
Relation-Back Doctrine: The idea that later events can “relate back” to an earlier date for legal purposes. The court held relation-back does not apply to cure standing defects once prescription has run.

5. Conclusion

Navarre v. AIG Property Casualty crystallizes a straightforward yet often overlooked principle: an assignment that is only promised is not an assignment that is made. The Fifth Circuit’s opinion reinforces three vital points: (1) standing must exist at the moment of filing; (2) conditional language postpones the transfer of rights until conditions are satisfied; and (3) prescription continues to run against both assignor and would-be assignee, unaltered by belated paperwork.

For transactional lawyers, the decision is a cautionary tale emphasizing linguistic precision and timely execution. For litigators, it offers a clear roadmap for challenging claims based on unperfected assignments. And for courts, it provides a concise, doctrine-driven framework for analyzing similar disputes at the crossroads of contract interpretation, standing, and prescription.

Key Takeaway: In Louisiana (and, by persuasive weight, within the Fifth Circuit), a contemplated future assignment does not confer present standing, and an assignment executed after prescription cannot revive extinguished rights.