Towns v. Vermont Mutual Insurance , 169 Vt. 545 ( 1999 )

Document Info

Docket Number： 98-259

Citation Numbers： 726 A.2d 65, 169 Vt. 545

Judges： Applying the Rule of Insurance Contract Construction That the Language Must Be Strictly Construed Against the Insurer, We Must First Conclude That the Language or Provision at Issue is Ambiguous. See 2 L. Russ & T. Segalla, Couch on Insurance ⧠21.11 (3d Ed.1995). Although We Have No Easy Guidelines by Which to Gauge Whether Language in an Insurance Contract is Ambiguous, Generally Ambiguity Exists if Language is Reasonably or Fairly Susceptible to Different Interpretations. See

Filed Date： 1/26/1999

Precedential Status： Precedential

Modified Date： 8/26/2023

Authorities (5)

Warren K. Huntzinger and Nancy J. Huntzinger v. Hastings ... , 143 F.3d 302 ( 1998 )

State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Thomas , 756 F. Supp. 440 ( 1991 )

Garneau v. Curtis & Bedell, Inc. , 158 Vt. 363 ( 1992 )

Northern Security Insurance v. Hatch , 165 Vt. 383 ( 1996 )

Isbrandtsen v. North Branch Corp. , 150 Vt. 575 ( 1988 )

View All Authorities »

Cited By (4)

Sachs v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. , 251 P.3d 543 ( 2010 )

Co-Operative Insurance Companies v. Woodward , 191 Vt. 348 ( 2012 )

City of Burlington v. Hartford Steam Boiler , 190 F. Supp. 2d 663 ( 2002 )

Folkman v. Quamme , 264 Wis. 2d 617 ( 2003 )

View All Citing Opinions »