Two-year contractual statute of limitations violation warrants dismissal.

The plaintiff suffered a loss to its insured business premises on May 7, 2006. The loss rendered JAM's business equipment and property unusable during the remediation and cleanup period, and it caused an interruption and suspension of JAM's operations. The Harleysville policy provided coverage for actual loss of business income sustained due to the necessary suspension of operations during restoration. The policy also contained a two-year contractual limitations period. The plaintiff brought sought on January 28, 2011, and Harleysville filed a motion to dismiss based upon the two-year contractual limitations period. Because it was clear on the face of the complaint that the statute of limitations barred the plaintiff's claim, Harleysville's motion to dismiss was appropriately filed and granted. The plaintiffs, however, were given leave to amend the complaint because the facts suggested that the plaintiff may be able to raise valid defenses of waiver and estoppel.

Case Law Alert - 3rd Qtr 2012