Conspicuous, Plain and Clear Exclusion Must be Honored

Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/flowers-died-due-governmental-action-excluded-barry-zalma-esq-cfe and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 3650 posts.

Plaintiffs FlorExpo, LLC (“FlorExpo”) and Kendal Floral Supply, LLC (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) are leading importers and distributors of fresh-cut flowers from South America. When their claim was denied they sued Travelers in FlorExpo LLC and Kendal Floral Supply, LLC v. Travelers Property Casualty Company Of America, Case No.: 20-CV-1024 JLS (DEB), United States District Court Southern District Of California (March 8, 2021). Travelers Property Casualty Company of America’s Moved to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint.

ZALMA OPINION

Courts are often asked to interpret insurance policies written in conspicuous, plain and clear language understandable by anyone with a fourth-grade education. When a claim is rejected the insured attempts to create an ambiguity that doesn’t exist or ask the court to rewrite the policy since it is unfair to make the insured cover an uninsured loss. Thankfully, the USDC, as do almost every court, refused to rewrite the policy and interpreted it as written.