The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court’s summary judgment disposing of an insured’s suit for hail damage to a tile roof and for ensuing interior water damage, finding that the record included no evidence that the hail damage occurred during the relevant renewal policy period referenced in the insured’s complaint, holding that prior policy renewals are separate contracts, rejecting the insured’s argument that the court should consider the “policy period” to include prior policy renewal periods, and concluding that the court did not abuse its discretion by excluding the insured’s testifying expert where the insured had failed to properly disclose the expert and the expert could not state when the hail damage had occurred.
