Vargas v. Insurance Co. of North America

1. What if the plane crash had occurred between Miami and Haiti rather than Haiti and Puerto Rico. Would that matter under Judge Sofaer's interpretation of the policy? Would it matter whether Haiti was intended the final destination, a brief refueling waypoint, or a multi-day stopover on a trip that was intended to end in Puerto Rico?

2. Suppose your answer is that it was the intentions of the parties not to cover losses for crashes between Miami and Haiti if Haiti was the final destination but to cover losses for crashes between Miami and Haiti if Puerto Rico was the final destination. Why would anyone want that kind of coverage?  If your answer is that you can't imagine why anyone would want such coverage, should that affect your interpretation of the policy?

3. What is your view of Judge Sofaer's determination that, because a Caribbean endorsement that would unquestionably have provided coverage here costs only $50, there were no substantial risks involved in covering Khurey notwithstanding his non-purchase of the Caribbean endorsement? What are the factual predicates behind this assertion?  Suppose, for example, that traveling in the Caribbean carried 5 times the risk per mile as traveling in the continental United States. But suppose, also, that even purchasers of the Caribbean endorsement on average flew only 1% of their air miles within the Caribbean. Do you see that the endorsement would add only 4% to the expected losses of the insurer even though the conduct was very dangerous? Should this matter?

4. Suppose, like your Professor, you are suspicious of Judge Sofaer's interpretation of the policy? Still, would you argue that there is no coverage if the plane crashes, say 10 miles off the California coast when vectored there by air traffic control on a flight from El Paso in order to land on an eastbound runway due to the wind? Would you argue that there is no coverage if the plane crashes on a normal route from Miami to Houston, which goes well out into the Gulf? 

5. Judge Sofaer seems to think it matters that the insured stated in his application that he intended to fly on vacations outside the United States and that he crashed while on Christmas vacation. Why is this relevant. if I indicate that I have cancer at the time I contract for a back massage, can I sue the masseuse when it does not cure my cancer? Are there any contexts in which one side of a transaction has a duty to provide a suitable product or to explicitly disclaim that the product is suitable?