Femia v. Graphic Arts Mutual Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• where the “evidence introduced by the parties extrinsic to the [contract] was not dispositive of the [interpretation] issue ... the proper interpretation is an issue of law for the court”
• “Since evidence introduced by the parties extrinsic to the policies was not dispositive of the issue, the IAS court also properly relied on the doctrine of contra pfoferentem[.]” (italics in original)
• where the “evidence introduced by the parties extrinsic to the [contract] was not dispositive of the [interpretation] issue ... the proper interpretation is an issue of law for the court”
• “Since evidence introduced by the parties extrinsic to the policies was not dispositive of the issue, the IAS court also properly relied on the doctrine of contra preferentum, under which any ambiguity is liberally construed in favor of the insured and against the insurer.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).