Did the court of appeals' expansive reading of a boilerplate exclusion used nationwide by insurers in their commercial liability policies, a reading which makes the policy's coverage illusory and therefore worthless, overturn North Dakota substantive law, create a split of authority among the jurisdictions which have considered the identical question and deprive petitioner of the property rights to which it would otherwise be entitled in State court?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. Did the court of appeals’ expansive reading of a boilerplate exclusion used nationwide by insurers in their commercial liability policies, a reading which makes the policy's coverage illusory and therefore worthless, overturn North Dakota substantive law, create a split of authority among the jurisdictions which have considered the identical question and deprive petitioner of the property rights to which it would otherwise be entitled in State court? 2. Can the Violation of Statutes exclusion used nationwide by insurance companies when writing commercial liability policies be enlarged despite its limiting language to incorporate the violation of any statute, ordinance or regulation “which prohibits or limits material or information” in order to deny coverage for claims understood to be within the range of risks contemplated by the insured when it purchased the policy?