The court considered three arguments made by Allstate before making their ruling.

A United States District Court ruled against the insured after ruling that NFIP policies must be strictly adhered to since they are paid with federal funds.

A US District Court made the ruling after analyzing the insurance policy to determine the intended coverage.

The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's ruling after applying a strict liability standard.

The Delaware Superior Court reversed the ruling by the Industrial Accident Board after finding that the employee was acting outside the course and scope of his employment.

Red Roof Inns has eleven pending civil lawsuits alleging that Red Roof benefited from the trafficking. The court determined if that constituted an occurrence under the insurance policy.

A Florida Circuit Court made the ruling after analyzing the policy's defintion and considering what an ordinary person would reasonably expect the exclusion to apply to.

The court analyzed whether certain policy terms were ambiguous and whether an endorsement's coverage was illusory.

The California Appellate Court looked at the policy's continuous or repeated seepage or leakage exclusion and whether State Farm presented enough evidence in support of the claim denial.

The Delaware Superior Court ruled in favor of AMC after looking at the policy's definition of "loss".