Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London v. Rucker Construction Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that trial court did not err in finding that language in insurance contract was sufficiently ambiguous to create a jury question, and that evidence supported jury’s verdict that insurer breached the contract
• holding that trial court did not err in finding that language in insurance contract was sufficiently ambiguous to create a jury question, and that evidence supported jury’s verdict that insurer breached the contract
• holding that it could not be said that, as a matter of law, insurance company had a reasonable defense to claim when insurance company, through correspondence, had been put on notice of the difficulty in construing policy
• holding that it could not be said that, as a matter of law, insurance company had a reasonable defense to claim when insurance company, through correspondence, had been put on notice of the difficulty in construing policy
• concluding the phrase “designed for travel on public roads” in an insurance policy was ambiguous
• “If this is how the insurance adjuster understood it, certainly this is what a reasonable insured could expect it to mean.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).