Scherbo v. Gutsu

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting appellant’s argument that the Legislature intended the definition of “insured” under the statute at issue to apply only to named insureds because “[t]he Legislature could have used the phrase ‘named insured’ if it intended to do so”
• \We determine whether an insurance policy provides coverage by looking to the language of the insurance policy itself.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).