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.
3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 11 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 Fireman's Fund Insurance v. Atlantic Richfield Co..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fireman's Fund Insurance v. Atlantic Richfield Co. Anchor | green | “an insurance company's failure to use available language to exclude certain types of liability gives rise to the inference that the parties intended not to so limit coverage.” | 5 |
| 2 | Kane v. Royal Insurance Co. of America | green | “the inundation of insureds' normally dry land falls squarely within the generally accepted definitions of the term 'flood.” | 3 |
| 3 | Smyth v. USAA Property & Casualty Ins. Co. | green | “that this definition is not identical in the primary and excess policies does not create an ambiguity.” | 3 |
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.