This Note first analyzes the majority's introduction of a tort concept of proximate cause for deciding insurance cases-and for covertly making public policy. Second, the Note analyzes the dissent's failure to modify its traditional contract analysis to meet the needs of consumers who purchase standard form contracts. The Note recommends the use of an adhesion contract analysis and a common sense test of causation for deciding consumer insurance cases. The Note considers the insurance industry's dilemma as it attempts to respond to plain language legislation while still controlling its exposure to liability. The Note considers as well the public in fair and comprehensible insurance policies.
Lynn B. Squires,
Autopsy of a Plain English Insurance Contract: Can Plain English Survive Proximate Cause?—Graham v. Public Employees Mut. Ins. Co., 98 Wn. 2d 533, 656 P.2d 1077 (1983),
59 Wash. L. Rev.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol59/iss3/7