Clendenin Bros. v. United States Fire Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that we apply the objective interpretation of contracts with equal force to insurance policies
• requiring insurance companies to provide a defense if there is a potentiality that the policy covers the claim
• requiring insurance companies to provide a defense if there is a potentiality that the policy covers the claim
• using similar language regarding “discharge, dispersal, seepage, migration, release or escape of pollutants,” as well as the exact same definition of pollutant
• requiring courts applying Maryland law to “accord a word its usual, ordinary and accepted meaning unless there is evidence that the parties intended to employ it in a special or technical sense” (quoting Cheney v. Bell Nat. Life Ins., 556 A.2d 1135, 1138 (Md. 1989))
• “If there is a possibility, even a remote one, that the plaintiffs claims could be covered by the policy, there is a duty to defend.” (internal citations omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).