Murray v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that policy provision drafted to circumvent efficient proximate cause doctrine conflicts with reasonable expectations of parties and is unenforceable
• recognizing that direct physical loss requires property to be damaged, not destroyed, and may exist without structural damage to insured property
• stating that a court interpreting an insurance policy should give the language of the policy “its plain, ordinary meaning”
• holding policyholders to suffer a “direct physical loss” when their homes were rendered uninhabitable due to threat of rockfall
• holding loss of use found when insureds were compelled to leave homes due to threat of falling rocks after nearby homes were harmed by falling rocks
• holding physical loss of use found when insureds were compelled to leave homes due to threat of falling rocks after nearby homes were harmed by falling rocks

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).