Courts never tire of saying an insurance policy is "just a contract" and subject to ordinary rules of contract law, especially the plain language approach that strives for formal neutrality between the parties. Yet courts also frequently rely on a narrative that an insurance policy strives to be a "just contract" with special pro-policyholder rules that reach beyond the plain language. How is insurance simultaneously "just a contract" and a "just contract?" When the issue relates to scope or breadth of coverage—whether a loss is included within the bounds of the policy—strict construction gains the upper hand. But when the focus is on the suite of rights that flow from coverage—such as expanded remedies available upon an insurer breach—courts craft coverage rights which are deeper than what can be derived from the plain meaning of the policy. This talk demonstrates the importance of this distinction and demonstrates its implications. Recommended Reading: Chaim Saiman, Is Insurance "Just a Contract" or a "Just Contract"?, 83 Md. L. Rev. 819 (2024).

Career & Professional Development, Conferences & Speakers, Training & Workshops