Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 34 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Anderson.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Anderson Anchor | green | “exclusionary clauses are construed even more strictly against the insurer than coverage clauses.” | 12 |
| 2 | Swire Pacific Holdings, Inc. v. Zurich Ins. Co. | green | “insurance contracts must be construed in accordance with the plain language of the policy.” | 6 |
| 3 | Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Beaver | green | “it has the burden of demonstrating that the allegations of the complaint are cast solely and entirely within the policy exclusion and are subject to no other reasonable interpretation.” | 5 |
| 4 | Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc. v. Mid-Continent Casualty Co. | green | “show either that a policy exclusion applies or that no coverage exists, no duty to defend arises.” | 5 |
| 5 | Stephens Ex Rel. Estate of Becker v. Mid-Continent Casualty Co. | green | “the duty to defend arises if the relevant pleadings allege facts that fairly and potentially bring the suit within policy coverage.” | 5 |
| 6 | Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Beaver | green | “that the allegations of the complaint are cast solely and entirely within the policy exclusion and are subject to no other reasonable interpretation” | 1 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.