News - Insurance

Monday, Nov. 09, 2009

Oceanographer reined in at wind trial

GULFPORT — An oceanographer testified in federal court Tuesday that water was 10 times as destructive as wind during Hurricane Katrina, but he was disqualified from saying how those forces impacted the Bossier home.

In the case of Bossier v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., Reginald “Ed” Bossier is asking the jury to award him the policy limit of $650,000 on his home on the north side of Biloxi’s Back Bay. State Farm has paid him $93,480 for wind damage, with $77,000 of that amount paid four years after Katrina as the case headed to trial.

Bossier’s attorney, Judy Guice, objected to two State Farm expert witnesses testifying about whether wind or water destroyed Bossier’s house and outbuilding because they don’t have engineering licenses.

“I agree with her,” said U.S. District Court Sr. Judge L.T. Senter Jr. He allowed Robert H. Weisberg, an oceanography professor at the University of South Florida, to testify about the strength of the wind, water currents, waves and storm surge. But Senter ruled, “He may not give an engineering opinion on this case.”

Mississippi law says only a licensed engineer can determine what caused a structural failure, said Senter, and Weisberg doesn’t have an engineering license in Mississippi or any state.

Using more than a dozen charts, Weisberg showed the storm surge in the area near Bossier’s home was between 18.6 and 20.6 feet. Katrina wasn’t a tsunami, he said. “It rose very fast but it was not a wall of water,”

Weisberg said the wind peaked around 10:30 a.m. on Aug. 29, 2005 and the surge around 11 or 11:15 a.m. Different wind models indicate that could have occurred up to an hour earlier, he said.

He used a composite of evidence from FEMA, NOAA and other agencies to compile his report on Katrina’s impact.

On cross-examination, Weisberg said information was computer simulation, similar to what is used to forecast weather, and not based on eyewitness accounts. He said the highest wave could have been twice the height of the highest significant wave, and the highest gust of wind also could have been much higher than the sustained wind.

“The potential for impact by water versus wind forces was overwhelmingly on the side of water,” he said.

In a written statement Monday, State Farm said “... based on the testimony of both parties, it is clear that Mr. Bossier and State Farm have different views regarding whether it was wind or storm surge that destroyed Mr. Bossier’s home. We feel that the evidence presented at the trial will establish State Farm has paid Mr. Bossier for the damage caused by wind. Unfortunately, the remainder of the damage to the Bossier home was caused by storm surge and therefore excluded by his homeowners insurance policy.”

The trial began Nov. 2 and Senter said it could wrap up today. Closing arguments are expected to begin at 1 p.m., followed by jury instructions.

“We’re trying a hurricane insurance case in here and we’ve got to worry about a hurricane outside as well,” he said.