Allstate Indemnity Company v. Nicole Riverson

MEMORANDUM

Defendants-Appellants Nicole Johnson Riverson, James and Leila Curtis, and James Curtis as guardian for S.C., appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff-Appellee Allstate Indemnity Company (Allstate) on Allstate’s claims for declaratory relief. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

The district court did not err in concluding that the acts of J.J., Riverson’s minor child, were excluded from coverage under the “sexual molestation” exclusion of Riv-erson’s Home Day Care Coverage Endorsement. In construing the language of an insurance policy under Washington law, we examine the contract as a whole. E-Z Loader Boat Trailers, Inc. v. Travelers Indem. Co., 106 Wash.2d 901 , 726 P.2d 439, 443 (1986). “A policy provision is ambiguous when, on its face, it is fairly susceptible to two different interpretations, both of which are reasonable.” Id. (citations omitted). “A provision, however, is not ambiguous merely because the parties suggest opposing meanings.” Mayer v. Pierce Cnty. Med. Bureau, Inc., 80 Wash.App. 416 , 909 P.2d 1323, 1326 (1995) (citation omitted). “[A]mbiguity will not be read into a contract where…