including all resulting loss of use of that property” or “[l]oss of use of tangible property that is not physically injured.” (Nautilus Mot. Summ. J., Ex. D at CGL Coverage Form, Sec. V, ¶ 17; Century Mot. Summ. J., Ex. B at 22.) Costs incurred to prevent future occurrences that may cause damage to property or life may be considered property damage as well. See U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Nev. Cement Co., 93 Nev. 179, 561 P.2d 1335, 1336-38 (1977) (finding the insured should not be penalized for taking measures to prevent the collapse of a building constructed with defective cement, and that the preventative measures were property damage under the policy); see also Desert Mountain Props. Ltd. P’ship v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 225 Ariz. 194, 236 P.3d 421, 437-38 (Ariz.Ct.App.2010) (<HOLDING>). To find otherwise would require the insured
holding that the rights of an aggrieved party are substantially affected if the outcome either would have or may have been different had the error not occurred holding that the proper measure of damages was the present value of all unaccrued payments that the plaintiff would have received if the contract had been performed recognizing nlrb authority  to take measures designed to recreate the conditions and relationships that would have been had there been no unfair labor practice  holding that the core inquiry is whether the police would have discovered the evidence if the misconduct had not occurred holding preventative measures are covered if the damage intended to be prevented probably would have occurred during the policy period if the preventative measures had not been performed