Two Rule 23 orders involving insurers highlight a major difference between the treatment of ambiguities in insurance policies and other types of contracts. They illustrate how under general contract law, ambiguities raise issues of fact calling for resolution by evidence of party intent extrinsic to the contract’s language, while insurance policy interpretation remains an issue of law with ambiguities resolved against insurers.The general contract rule prevailed in JLG Indus., Inc. v. Tokio Marine Specialty Ins. Co., 2019 …