Pedler v. Aetna Life Insurance

Today the majority unfairly interprets an insurance policy strictly against the insured, and liberally in favor of the insurer; accordingly, I must dissent.

It is undisputed that by the terms of Aetna’s master policy, James Pedler would not have been eligible for supplemental coverage until he had been employed by General Highway Express, Inc. for two years, and that he had been so employed for only a few months at the time he applied for supplemental coverage. Further, the parties stipulated that all employees received a booklet explaining available insurance coverage. That booklet contained…