Millers Capital Insurance Co. v. Gambone Bros. Development Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding subcontractor’s faulty construction was not an occurrence under a CGL policy with a subcontractor exception to a “your work” exclusion
• noting that the insured “purchased extensive insurance coverage” in order “[t]o cover the unforeseen risks and hazards inherent in” its insured interest
• holding subcontractor’s faulty construction was not an occurrence under a CGL policy with a subcontractor exception to a “your work” exclusion
• holding subcontractor’s faulty construction was not an occurrence under a CGL policy with a subcontractor exception to a “your work” exclusion
• stating that homeowners had agreement to purchase home from insured, without discussing whether there were bargained-for standards in purchase, and holding there is no duty to defend faulty workmanship in homes
• stating that when courts must choose between two competing interpretations of an insurance policy, “we are bound, as a matter of law, to choose the interpretation which allows us to give effect to all of the policy’s language

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).