[D098]

doctrine of reasonable expectations

A term courts use to interpret policy language. If the policy does not expressly state that there is coverage, but a reasonable person would assume by the nature of the policy that the particular thing should be covered, then the court may use the doctrine of reasonable expectations to interpret the language in favor of what is expected. For example, in Max True Plastering Company, Plaintiff v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, Defendant, Oklahoma Supreme Court, No. 85,860, February 27, 1996, CCH 1996, Fire and Casualty Cases, Paragraph 5621, the court said, "The doctrine of reasonable expectations has evolved as an interpretive tool to aid courts in discerning the intention of the parties bound by adhesion contracts."