Groshong v. Mutual of Enumclaw Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• using the wording of the phrase at issue and the context in which the wording occurs to analyze whether the phrase is ambiguous, without any consideration of the policyholder’s reasonable expectations
• applying ejusdem generis at the “text and context” level of contract interpretation
• “[T]he phrase, ‘other invasion of the right of private occupancy’ applies only to offenses that involve a possessory interest in the premises at issue .”
• court turns to aids to construction only if the policy does not define critical terms
• “[T]his court has stated that ‘the rule of ejusdem generis in contracts is peculiarly applicable where specific enumeration precedes the word ‘other’ followed by general words’.”
• even where one party’s interpretation of term was demonstrably less plausible than the other party’s interpretation, that did not render either interpretation implausible

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).