Matthews v. Penn-America Insurance

(dissenting) — Penn-America had every right to state, in its policy language, that the word “family” would include only persons related by blood or law.7 It did not do that. As a result, an average purchaser of insurance would have understood at least one reasonable meaning of the word “family” to encompass the stable social group maintained by Ray Edinger (Ray), Sue Matthews (Sue), and Blake Matthews (Blake).8 We are obligated to adopt that *757meaning, and thus to find coverage.

The trial court granted summary judgment to Penn-America, so we must view the record in the light most favorable to…