Insurance — business policy — loss from roof collapse — exclusion from coverage
The Court of Appeals' decision that summary judgment was improperly entered in favor of defendant insurer in plaintiff's action to recover under a business insurance policy for loss of business income as a result of a roof collapse during replacement was reversed for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion that the undisputed evidence showed that plaintiff's losses were caused by a poorly maintained roof and during work to repair or replace it, and that losses from collapse caused by faulty or inadequate maintenance or during construction were expressly excluded from coverage under the policy.
PER CURIAM.
For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion, the decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed.
REVERSED.
Chief Justice PARKER and Justice HUDSON did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.