Insurance
May 18, 2012
Ambiguity and the interpretation of insurance policies in California
Is the Supreme Court's test for policy interpretation consistent with the ordinary rules of contract interpretation in California? By J. Robert Renner of Duane Morris LLP
Over the last 25 years, the state Supreme Court has stated various iterations of a two or three part test for interpreting insurance policies, most typically: first, "plain meaning" - if the policy language is clear and explicit, it governs; second, the insured's "reasonable expectations" - if the policy terms are ambiguous, they will be interpreted to protect the objectively reasonable expectations of the insured; and ...
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