The erstwhile owners of New York's World Trade Centre are arguing with their insurers. Was each plane a separate attack? Or was did both constitute a single coordinated attack?

This matters, because there seems to be a maximum pay-out per event. So if there was only one event, the maximum payout would be 3½ billion dollars. If it were two, then it would be $7 billion.

See Insurance battle over Twin Towers.

It seems to me that, since you certainly couldn't consider both planes striking the WTC as a coincidence, then it must be one event. But then, I'm not a lawyer. And where there is 3½ billion dollars at stake, I'm sure that you can find lawyers who can prove just about anything, or go down trying.

And if you think the whole argument is ridiculous, I can tell you, from my exposure to the insurance industry, that this is by no means the most insane thing going on...