( July 20, 2023, 1:47 PM EDT) -- MINNEAPOLIS — Finding that whether three insurers “intended to create an anti-concurrent causation clause” in their policies’ earth movement definition is “ambiguous,” a federal judge in Minnesota determined that earth movement caused by faulty workmanship or settling is covered by the earth movement coverage extension in the policies, “regardless of if the faulty workmanship and/or settling is the proximate cause of the loss,” granting partial summary judgment to their mutual insured....