Valley Forge Insurance v. Field

The insurers’ interpretation of the phrase “care, custody or control,” which the majority has adopted, is certainly rational. However, I am not persuaded that the policy language indisputably supports this interpretation. In my view, the interpretation offered by the defendants is equally (if not more so) rational. Because I think my colleagues got it wrong when they disregarded the defendants’ interpretation — rendering erroneous their conclusion that there is no insurance coverage — I dissent.

I

Under Massachusetts law, ambiguity exists when the language in an insurance policy “is susceptible…