Logical Reasoning

PT135 · S1 · Q14 Principle: If an insurance policy

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Principle: If an insurance policy is written in such a way that a reasonable person seeking insurance would not read it thoroughly before signing it, then the reasonable expectations of the policyholder concerning the policy's coverage should take legal precedence over specific language in the written policy itself.

Principle

If a insurance policy the reasonable too complicated for expectations of the reasonable person → policy holder to read it thoroughly outrank the actual before signing policy language.

Application

Celia got hail damage on her car. The insurance policy specifically says hail isn't covered. But according to this principle, the insurance company should have to cover the hail damage.

Evaluate / Goal

Our answer has to establish that Celia's case is an accurate application of this principle, so we need to ask ourselves about all the "boxes we need to check" to trigger this rule.

- the insurance policy had to be written in a way that no reasonable person would have read it thoroughly before signing it.

- it must be the reasonable expectations of a policyholder concerning the policy's coverage that, "hail damage is covered by this policy"

14.

Which one of the following, if true, most justifies the above application of the principle?

  1. Celia is a reasonable person,

    Weak Match

    The rule stipulates that it's both a reasonable person and a reasonable expectation. One does not imply the other, since reasonable people sometimes have unreasonable expectations. And this answer doesn't address whether the insurance policy was written in a way that discouraged reading it.

    5% picked this

  2. Correct

    Given the way it was

    Why this is right

    This satisfied all of our needs: - the insurance policy had to be written in a way that no reasonable person would have read it thoroughly before signing it. "Given the way it's written, reasonable wouldn't read ..." - it must be the reasonable expectations of a policyholder concerning the policy's coverage that, "hail damage is covered by this policy" "Celia reasonably expected hail coverage"

    Skill tested: Principle-Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

    76% picked this

  3. The insurance policy that Celia

    Bad #2 Match

    1. the insurance policy had to be written in a way that no reasonable person would have read it thoroughly before signing it. Looking good, the first half matches up. - it must be the reasonable expectations of a policyholder concerning the policy's coverage that, "hail damage is covered by this policy" If she thoroughly read the policy before signing it, then it would be unreasonable for her to have expected hail coverage, since there was specific language in the policy she thoroughly read that excluded hail coverage.

    2% picked this

  4. Celia did not read the

    Missing #1

    1. the insurance policy had to be written in a way that no reasonable person would have read it thoroughly before signing it. No information provided about whether this is the sort of policy where there "don't have to read it / reasonable expectations are honored" applies. - it must be the reasonable expectations of a policyholder concerning the policy's coverage that, "hail damage is covered by this policy"

    12% picked this

  5. Celia did not read the

    Missing #2

    - the insurance policy had to be written in a way that no reasonable person would have read it thoroughly before signing it. Cool, we establish that reasonable people wouldn't read it, just like Celia didn't. - it must be the reasonable expectations of a policyholder concerning the policy's coverage that, "hail damage is covered by this policy" Nothing is established about whether it was reasonable to expect hail coverage.

    5% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free