Allstate Insurance Company v. Dwight H. Smith, M.D.

How courts have described this case

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

• justifying its interpretation of similar terminology in an insurance policy by noting that the alternative would cause other language within the policy to be “seemingly rendered meaningless”
• concluding that it is ambiguous
• concluding that it is ambiguous
• describing an “easy to imagine” situation where a “leaky roof could lead to water damage to [someone’s] property. Presumably, water damage would be an ensuing loss covered by the policy but repairing the roof would not be covered.”
• describing an “easy to imagine” situation where a “leaky roof could lead to water damage to [someone’s] property. Presumably, water damage would be an ensuing loss covered by the policy but repairing the roof would not be covered.”
• \IIlt is important to remember that the policy's meaning 'is to be derived from the cireumstances of the particular case and not in the abstract.'\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).