• The subsequent damages clause is an exception to the first party property policy exception that applies to a special type of fact model where damage caused by an excluded hazard acts as a link in a “chain of events” that allows the covered hazard to damage other property. Symbolically, the classical model of the fact of losses can be represented as follows: excluded risk → excluded damage → covered risk → subsequent damage. Note that there must be two types of damage: initial loss and subsequent loss. Most courts will not apply the resulting indemnity provision if the excluded peril caused a covered peril that results in only one type of damage. Subsequent indemnity provisions were developed after the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. Ground movement caused approximately $80 million in property damage. Gas ejected from pipes ruptured during the shaking started a fire that spread to the rest of the city and caused another $400 million in other property damage (in 1906 dollars). Symbolically: earth movement (hazard excluded) → earthquake damage (loss excluded) → fire (hazard covered) → fire damage (next loss). The insurers argued that under the usual “immediate cause” rule, ground movement was the hazard that set the “chain of events” in motion, and that since ground movement was ruled out, fire damage was also ruled out. In the aftermath of the San Francisco earthquake, the California legislature passed a series of pieces of legislation to prevent insurers from waiving insurance coverage for earthquake-related fires. To comply with these and similar laws in other states, major insurers have added exemptions to their earthquake exemptions while maintaining coverage for subsequent fires. Later, the damages exceptions arising from this were included in many other types of exceptions.