Richardson v. Farmers Insurance Co. of Arizona

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that unambiguous contracts need only be applied rather than interpreted
• explaining that unambiguous contracts need only be applied rather than interpreted
• “Absent ambiguity, provisions of [a] contract need only be applied, rather than construed or interpreted.”
• “Absent ambiguity, provisions of a contract need only be applied, rather than construed or interpreted.”
• “The question of whether an ambiguity exists [in an insurance policy] is a question of law to be decided by the court.”
• “A contract is deemed ambiguous only if it is reasonably and fairly susceptible of different constructions.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).