As someone who works in the residential mortgage industry for a living, I’ve found it to be VERY commonplace that an insurer’s replacement cost estimate on a given property is valued lower than the actual market price (especially when you get to properties valued in the upper six digits to the lower seven digits, at least in my experience).
The other thing to remember is that the replacement cost is based only on the building and property improvements, not on the land itself. Trump properties in Manhattan are located on prime real estate -- or at least, what used to be prime real estate before the city turned into Mogadishu on the Hudson.
The scope of what you’re talking about is nothing like this case. I think a lot of people don’t understand the ruling or have their head in the sand.