Penn-America Insurance v. Mike's Tailoring

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that flow reversal was not required based on what a “lay person reading the policy would understand”
• finding that exclusion for “[w]ater that backs up from a sewer or drain,” was facially unambiguous.
• involving alleged damage from a “clogged sewer line running underneath [Plaintiff’s] property”
• “Likewise, we conclude that regardless of what 22 may have initiated the obstruction of the sewer beneath [the insured’s] basement, there was 23 only one cause of the damage, the backup of water in the sewer clean-out pipe.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).