Clayton Carter and Susan Price v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Child

How courts have described this case

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

• agreeing with Powers Chemco in rejecting the view that the pollution exclusion applies only where the insured was an active and immediate participant in the pollution activity at issue
• discussing the reasonable expectation doctrine as a tool for interpreting ambiguous contracts
• coverage for workers exposed to fumes released from furnaces used to burn rubber off parts of military vehicles was excluded under pollution exclusion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).