Levine v. Connally

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that where condition included in one provision is omitted from another, it “must be assumed to have been intentional under accepted canons of contract construction”
• recognizing that where condition included in one provision is omitted from another, it “must be assumed to have been intentional under accepted canons of contract construction”
• explaining that the mortgagee clause creates \an independent and separate insurance coverage for the mortgagee’s interest\
• holding where a policy provision is “clear and unambiguous, [it] must be given [its] plain and ordinary meaning, and courts should refrain from rewriting the agreement”
• noting that omission of a term in one provision of a contract that is included in another provision “must be assumed to have been intentional under accepted canons of construction”
• stating that insurance contracts are liberally construed in favor of the insured

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).