On February 13, 2015 the Fifth District Court of Appeal held in Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company v. Martinez that damage to a pool deck, rock garden, and waterfall was not an ensuing-loss.  During a tropical storm, the insured partially emptied his in-ground swimming pool because it was overflowing.  During the storm subsurface water accumulated underneath the pool which exerted hydrostatic pressure on the partially emptied pool causing the pool shell to lift out of the ground, damaging the shell as well as the pool deck, rock garden, and waterfall.  Liberty Mutual denied the claim pursuant to the Water Exclusion provision and the insured argued the ensuing-loss provision in the policy provided coverage.  The Fifth District held that the subject damage was not an ensuing-loss as a result of the anti-concurrent cause provision thereby rendering the loss not covered by the insurance policy.