Blossfeld v. Pacific Tank & Pipe Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• reasoning that if an insurance company intended to exclude a certain situation from coverage, “it could have done so easily” and refusing to add exclusionary language that the insurance company “could have, but did not, put in the policy”
• refusing to read a “collision” exclusion into a policy that was not explicitly part of the policy, and holding that “[i]f defendant intended to exclude from its specified perils coverage losses caused by collision, it could have done so easily.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).