Baltimore is not the first place afflicted by riots that caused coverage disputes. After the Martin Luther King riots in 1968, D.C. had a series of cases involving business interruption coverage and the government's curfew. (When I checked, I did not find any involving Maryland, but I can't imagine that none took place so I need to find time to check again.) In Bros., Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co., 268 A. 2d 611 (D.C. App. 1970), the D.C. Court of Appeals consider

The Baltimore Sun ran an article over the weekend that discussed business interruption insurance coverage because of the riots. That article took the view that the major problem is the war exclusion. I don't see that. The real problem is the Ordinance or Law exclusion. Why I doubt Insurers will use the "War and Military Action" exclusion The "War and Military Action" Exclusion (ISO Form CP 10 10 06 07 (2007)) excludes coverage for damage caused directly or indirectly by: (1)

Insurer acted in bad faith by failing to pay to replace damaged business property once it became clear that repairs had failed. The MIA found that Erie had acted in bad faith by not paying to replace Mayorga’s coffee roaster once all parties realized that repairs had failed. The MIA found that Erie’s attempts to avoid liability for the failed repairs was “underhanded.” The MIA did not, however, find that Erie had acted in bad faith by asking for more time to resolve the busin