Blaine Construction Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Insurance Company of North America, Defendant-Appellee/cross-Appellant

I disagree that we should consider this policy language to be ambiguous. I also believe that even if we treat it as ambiguous, Blaine’s interpretation is not a reasonable one. Therefore, I dissent.

I

For some reason, Blaine conceded at oral argument in the district court that the policy was unambiguous and did not attempt to argue otherwise. INA started the discussion with the following statement: “The cases indicate that they’re required to point to an ambiguity. What they’ve given the Court here is a strained interpretation. They haven’t pled an ambiguity; they haven’t proven an ambiguity;…