Coincidentally, a few days ago, this article in the West Virginia Record entitled Jury must apportion blame for flood among God and businesses poses a related conundrum. The article notes that in a trial beginning March 1, 2006, "[a] Raleigh County jury must divide the blame for the flood of July 8, 2001, between God and businesses." The plaintiffs claim that that "coal mines, timber operations and railroads changed the landscape in ways that made the flood worse.
Although I'm not sure the jury will be asked to apportion "blame" between humans and God (afterall, God is without fault), they will be instructed in accordance with Syllabus 10 of In Re Flood Litigation:
Where a rainfall event of an unusual and unforeseeable nature combines with a defendant's actionable conduct to cause flood damage, and where it is shown that a discrete portion of the damage complained of was unforeseeable and solely the result of such event and in no way fairly attributable to the defendant's conduct, the defendant is liable only for the damages that are fairly attributable to the defendant's conduct. However, in such a case, a defendant has the burden to show by clear and convincing evidence the character and measure of damages that are not the defendant's responsibility; and if the defendant cannot do so, then the defendant bears the entire liability.So, Overlawyered may get its question answered, to some extent, next month.