AIU Insurance v. Superior Court

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that courts, when interpreting insurance policies, “generally resolve ambiguities in 4 favor of coverage”
• noting that restitutionary awards “attempt to give the plaintiff the very thing to which he was entitled” rather than a “substitute for a suffered loss” (citation omitted)
• finding that pollution clean-up costs incurred under CERCLA 3 are insurable “damages”
• explaining that “the mutual intention of the parties at the time the contract is formed governs interpretation,” and such intention is to be inferred, if possible, “solely from the written provisions of the contract”
• espousing rationale that making insurance coverage hinge on “ ‘mere fortuity’ ” of the government’s choice of enforcement methods would “introduce substantial inefficiency in the cleanup process”
• construing the term \damages\ in a CGL policy as it relates to government-mandated cleanup costs

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).