- within Energy and Natural Resources, Government, Public Sector and Environment topic(s)
- in United States
- with readers working within the Environment & Waste Management industries
Ohio law requires courts to interpret ambiguous insurance-policy language against the drafter and in favor of policyholders. But if the language is clear and unambiguous (not to mention in a bold and ALLCAPS and super-big font), then courts apply the plain and ordinary meaning.
On the basis of that second rule of construction, Judge Readler, for a unanimous panel (Batchelder & Donald, JJ.), affirmed dismissal of a putative class action in Richelson v. Liberty Insurance. The Sixth Circuit Appellate Blog has a sister (re)insurance publication (perhaps more of a distant cousin?) which recently covered that decision. You can find that analysis here, with a good but provocative tip thrown in free of charge: It’s always a good idea to read your insurance policy.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
