Julian v. Rogers

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that insurer was not required to show prejudice in order to deny coverage pursuant to exclusionary provision that “contain[ed] no notice requirement”
• holding that it is improper to presume policy language to be “mere surplus”
• \we will not presume language in a policy to be mere surplus\
• \We will not presume language in a policy to be mere surplus.\
• language in insurance policy not presumed to be mere surplusage

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).