Insurance
Jun. 26, 2013
Words and insurance policies
A trend emerging in courts shows that the occasional absence (or presence) of words can be outcome determinative.
Rex Heeseman
JAMS
555 W 5th St Fl 32
Los Angeles , CA 90013-1055
Phone: (213) 253-9772
Fax: (213) 620-0100
Email: rheeseman@jamsdar.com
Stanford Univ Law School
Rex Heeseman retired from the Los Angeles Count Superior Court bench in 2014. He is at JAMS, Los Angeles. Besides speaking at various MCLE programs, he co-authors The Rutter Group's practice guide on "Insurance Litigation." From 2002 to 2015, he was an adjunct professor at Loyola Law School.
In resolving a dispute regarding policy interpretation, AIU Ins. Co. v. Superior Court, 51 Cal. 3d 807 (1990), articulated three standards to be applied in sequence: "plain meaning," "objectively reasonable expectations" and "contrainsurer." This "blockbuster" decision effectively changed the rules, including removing "ambiguity is king" as the guidepost.
Other decisions have applied these standards, sometimes blurring or in different ways. Consequently, some currently pro...For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In