Randy v. Progressive Northern Insurance 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 a contract is “ambiguous when the provisions in controversy are reasonably or fairly susceptible to different interpretations or may have two or more different meanings”
• “[C]reating an ambiguity where none exists could, in effect, create a new contract with rights, liabilities and duties to which the parties had not assented.”
• “we will not torture policy terms to create an ambiguity where an ordinary reading leaves no room for uncertainty”
• Retention provisions generally define the amount of expenses associated with a potentially covered claim the insured must pay before the insurer steps in and responds to the loss
• “Contracts are to be interpreted in a way that does not render any provisions illusory or meaningless.” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “Contracts are to be interpreted in a way that does not render any provisions ‘illusory or meaningless.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).