BlogLine

Eleventh Circuit rules in favor of insurer in longstanding coverage dispute raising novel coverage issues under Georgia law

9/15/25

By: William H. Buechner, Jr. and Philip W. Savrin

FMG Attorneys Phil Savrin and Bill Buechner prevailed upon the Eleventh Circuit to affirm the grant of summary judgment to the insurer on novel issues of Georgia insurance law. The case has a long history as it began in 2019, with portions tried to a jury before the insured appealed in 2024, resulting in a complete win for FMG’s client.

The insured in the case was TransWorld Food Service, LLC (“TransWorld”), a commercial wholesale food supplier that leased a warehouse where it stored food in a freezer. Practically every year, TransWorld presented a property loss claim to Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company (“Nationwide”) for coverage. In January 2016, a water main outside the warehouse failed, causing flooding that allegedly cracked the insulated walls of the freezer and damaged the food inside. Then, in July 2017, roofers accidentally cut the freon supply line to the freezer, which allegedly damaged the compressor and caused food to spoil. TransWorld promptly presented a claim to the roofer but waited until the claim was partially paid in November 2017 to notify Nationwide of the loss. Lastly, in July 2018, TransWorld claimed that a leak from a nearby unit ruined food in the freezer. 

Nationwide made partial payments on the 2016 loss, with a final payment in March 2018 when it denied owing the remainder of the amount sought. TransWorld then waited until July 2019 to file the lawsuit, despite a contractual suit limitation of one year. The Eleventh Circuit found the payments after the one-year period tolled, but did not waive the limitation period. Consequently, the lawsuit was filed more than a year after coverage was denied as time-barred. In reaching this conclusion, the Eleventh Circuit relied on a 1977 decision from the Court of Appeals of Georgia and distinguished other cases that merely held that the insurer’s conduct waived the contractual limitation period. 

The Eleventh Circuit also held that coverage for the 2017 loss was barred by the four-month delay in notifying Nationwide of the loss. In so ruling, the Eleventh Circuit found no meaningful difference between the policy condition requiring notice “as soon as practicable” and cases construing policies requiring “prompt” notice.

Lastly, TransWorld claimed that Nationwide improperly denied coverage for lost business income under the business interruption coverage in the policy. Rejecting this argument, the Eleventh Circuit agreed that “suspension of operations” under the policy required a total cessation of business operations and not a mere dip in revenue.

The case is styled: TransWorld Food Service, LLC v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, 2025 WL 2449061 (11th Cir. Aug. 26, 2025).

For more information, please contact William H. Buechner, Jr. at bill.buechner@fmglaw.com, Philip W. Savrin at philip.savrin@fmglaw.com or your local FMG attorney.

Information conveyed herein should not be construed as legal advice or represent any specific or binding policy or procedure of any organization. Information provided is for educational purposes only. These materials are written in a general format and not intended to be advice applicable to any specific circumstance. Legal opinions may vary when based on subtle factual distinctions. All rights reserved. No part of this presentation may be reproduced, published or posted without the written permission of Freeman Mathis & Gary, LLP.