Frankenmuth Mutual Insurance v. Masters

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “plurality opinions are not binding precedent because they did not garner a majority of the Court”
• stating that courts will not create ambiguities when the terms of the contract are clear
• stating that the applicable insurance policy defined the term “occurrence” as “an accident, . . . which occurs during the policy period”
• stating that the applicable insurance policy defined the term “occurrence” as “an accident, . . . which occurs during the policy period”
• stating that under Michigan law, ambiguities in an insurance contract are construed in favor of the insured
• explaining that Michigan courts “construe [insurance] polic[ies] in favor of the insured” and 20 “interpret the terms of an insurance contract in accordance with their commonly used meaning”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).