Commercial Union Insurance Co. v. Richard Sponholz Ingrid Sponholz

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “casualty” insurance policy did not cover “title” damages
• rejecting the plaintiff’s argument that the “all risks” casualty policy covered “seizure of the trawler because it was stolen,” and concluding that “[t]he district court was correct in distinguishing title insurance and casualty insurance”
• “Title insurance has been regarded as a separate type of contract not falling within any of the three basic classes of insurance. . . . It is not reasonable to interpret a policy so broadly that it becomes another type of policy altogether.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).