If A Contract Is Specific, It Means What It Says

31/ “IN THIS CASE, TITLE INSURANCE COVERS LOSSES ONLY TO THE POLICY'S VALUE”:  Mattson Ridge purchased title insurance when it bought land for development.  It later learned that the title was challengeable so it could not make profits by reselling individual lots from the property.

Mattson Ridge sued the insurer.  The district court found that the insurer was liable, but only up to the face value of the policy.  The Court of Appeals held that Mattson Ridge could also recover further damages from the lost profits it could have realized if the title had been clear.

The Supreme Court held that, on the basis of the facts in this case and the language of this particular contract. Mattson Ridge could only recover damages up to the face value set in the contract.


READ THE FULL CASE DECISION: 

Mattson Ridge, LLC, Respondent, vs. Clear Rock Tile, LLP, et al., Appellants.

December 12, 2012                            2012-147*          

https://mn.gov/law-library-stat/archive/supct/1212/OPA101483-1212.pdf