Sarky Mouradian v. Bankers Multiple Line Insurance Co.

96 F.3d 1451 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Sarky MOURADIAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BANKERS MULTIPLE LINE INSURANCE CO., Defendant-Appellee. No. 95-55794. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 6, 1996. Decided Sep. 10, 1996. Before: D.W. NELSON, T.G. NELSON and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 The parties are familiar with the facts, so we need not recite them here. 1. Unambiguous Contract 3 The language of the conditional receipt clause in this case states in unequivocal, plain language that payment of the premium does not automatically provide insurance coverage. The district court did not err in ruling as a matter of law that the conditional receipt clause was not ambiguous. 4 2. Rule 50(a) Motion Regarding Temporary Coverage 5 Temporary insurance may arise, even with an unambiguous conditional receipt clause, but only if the clause was not brought to the attention of the applicant and not adequately explained…