& Cas. Ins. Co., 434 F.3d 341, 344-45 (5th Cir.2005); see also Wright I, 415 F.3d at 390. This includes claims for statutory penalties under Louisiana law. See West v. Harris, 573 F.2d 873, 881 (5th Cir.1978); Bryars v. Imperial Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., Civil Action No. 11-72, 2011 WL 5402930, at *5 n. 9 (E.D.La. Nov. 8, 2011). Furthermore, the Fifth Circuit has held that the NFIA does not explicitly or implicitly authorize extra-contractual claims against WYO insurers based on federal common law. See Wright v. Allstate Ins. Co., 500 F.3d 390, 398 (5th Cir.2007) [“Wright II”].' In other words, insureds under SFIP policies have one remedy, and only one remedy for nonpayment of claims: a suit for breach of contract. See 42 U.S.C. § 4072 (authorizing such suits); Wright II, 500 F.3d at 398 (<HOLDING>). Here, plaintiffs lawsuit is based solely on
holding that wrongfuldeathtype damages such as loss of consortium were not authorized under  1983 and 1988 but noting that wrongful death claims were not foreclosed by  1983 claims but remainfed as pendent state claims holding that employees limited settlement of claims against third party did not extinguish claims of the insurer when employee and insurer had jointly filed suit against third party and settlement agreement provided that insurers claims would remain pending holding that policyholders cannot file extracontractual claims against wyo insurers because such claims were not explicitly or implicitly authorized by congress holding the state law claims were not preempted holding section 101106f cannot be used by employees to obtain dismissal of common law intentional tort claims because those claims could not have been brought under the texas tort claims act