Rummel v. Lexington Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that an ambiguity exists when a “particular matter of coverage is not explicitly addressed by the policy”
• stating that “ambiguous terms will be given the strongest interpretation against the insurer which they will reasonably bear” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• stating that “ambiguous terms will be given the strongest interpretation against the insurer which they will reasonably bear” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• summary judgment is appropriate where no facts are in dispute, but only the legal significance of the facts
• “The interpretation of an insurance contract is a matter of law about which the court has the final word.”
• “The interpretation of an insurance contract is a matter of law about which the court has the final word.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).