44 C.F.R. § 61.1
Purpose of part
This part describes the types of properties eligible for flood insurance coverage under the Program, the limits of such coverage, and the premium rates actually to be paid by insureds.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1982–2015 · leading case: Foster v. Fed. Emergency Mgmt. Agency, 128 F. Supp. 3d 717 (E.D.N.Y 2015).
Foster v. Fed. Emergency Mgmt. Agency, 128 F. Supp. 3d 717 (E.D.N.Y 2015). “*726 The regulations implementing the NFIA, 44 C.F.R. §§ 61.1 et seq., also indicate that policyholders cannot bring suit against FEMA when private insurers issue their policies and adjust the claims.”
Pavone, Inc. v. Sec'y of Hous. & Urban Dev., 547 F. Supp. 230 (D. Conn. 1982). “44 C.F.R. § 61.1 (13(d)). Thus, there can be no doubt that waiver of the proof of loss requirement can be executed only by a proper written document, not shown to exist in this case.”
Norman v. Fid. Nat'l Ins., 354 F. App'x 934 (5th Cir. 2009). “44 C.F.R. § 61.1 , et seq., which establishes the terms of the SFIP, requires the filing of a POL before the insured can receive payment on his claim.”
Dogwood Grocery, Inc. v. South Carolina Ins., 49 F. Supp. 2d 511 (W.D. La. 1999). “44 C.F.R. § 61.1 et seq. Policies must be issued in the form of a Standard Flood Insurance Policy, and no provision of the policy may be altered, varied, or waived without the express written consent of the Federal Insurance Administrator.”
Bullard v. Connor, 716 F. Supp. 1081 (N.D. Ill. 1989). “Indeed, plaintiff has not argued that he was ignorant of the proof of loss requirement; rather, he argues only that defendant’s conduct precludes reliance on the 60-day proof of loss requirement.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.