Beltway Management Co. v. Lexington-Landmark Insurance, 746 F. Supp. 1145 (1990)

Citation: Beltway Management Co. v. Lexington-Landmark Insurance, 746 F. Supp. 1145 (1990)
Parent Document: Beltway Management Co. v. Lexington-Landmark Insurance, 746 F. Supp. 1145 (1990)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 1990-09-19
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1757119/beltway-management-co-v-lexingt... ↗

Full Text

1,049 chars

The core question in this case— whether violations of the warranty of habitability constitute an invasion of the right of private occupancy under the Policy — is a difficult one. The phrase “other invasion of the right of private occupancy” is ambiguous, and both parties offer plausible interpretations. It is nevertheless possible to resolve this dispute because other tools of interpretation support Beltway’s interpretation. That interpretation better reflects both the Broad Form Endorsement as a whole and the specific context in which the language at issue occurs. Beltway’s interpretation also reflects contemporary thinking about the landlord-tenant relationship. It is also more consonant with interpretations by other courts of the same policy language than Landmark’s interpretation. Indeed, upon close analysis, Landmark’s interpretation is unacceptable because it would render “other invasions] of the right of private occupancy” mere surplus-age. Indeed, to give that phrase meaning, it may be necessary to interpret it to cover *1151

Other Sections in This Document (164)

Full Text