Opinion ID: 1790960
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: whether the terms of the insurance policy are ambiguous.

Text: ¶ 8. Where a contract is clear and unambiguous, its meaning and effect are matters of law. Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Buddy Jones Ford, Lincoln-Mercury Inc., 734 So.2d 173, 176 (Miss.1999); Overstreet v. Allstate Ins. Co., 474 So.2d 572, 575 (Miss.1985); Dennis v. Searle, 457 So.2d 941, 945 (Miss. 1984). OmniBank contends that the policy language which implicates coverage for occurrences or incidents is rendered ambiguous by exculpatory language which exempts coverage for bodily injury or property damage expected or intended from the standpoint of the insured. ¶ 9. It is well settled that ambiguous terms in an insurance contract are to be construed most strongly against the preparer, the insurance company. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Garriga, 636 So.2d 658, 662 (Miss.1994); Government Employees Ins. Co. v. Brown, 446 So.2d 1002 (Miss.1984); McLaurin v. Old So. Life Ins. Co., 334 So.2d 361 (Miss.1976). OmniBank contends that any ambiguity as to whether USF&G owed a duty to defend against the Ramsay lawsuit, should be resolved in its favor. The language at issue in the commercial general liability policy provides: COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE FORM SECTION ICOVERAGES    b. This insurance applies to bodily injury and property damage only if: (1) The bodily injury or property damage is caused by an occurrence that takes place in the coverage territory; and (2) The bodily injury or property damage occurs during the policy period.    SECTION VDEFINITIONS    12. Occurrence means an accident, including continuous or repeated exposure to substantially the same general harmful conditions.    The commercial umbrella liability policy provides: