for anything other than invasions of real property”); Martin, 699 F.Supp. at 170 (applying the principle of ejusdem generis to the personal injury definition of “other .invasion of the right of private occupancy” to determine that under Illinois law, it “provides coverage only if there exists a landlord-tenant relationship or if the plaintiff has a ‘vested property right’ ”); County of Columbia, 595 N.Y.S.2d at 991 (applying the principle of ejusdem generis to the personal injury definition of “other invasion of the right of private occupancy” to determine that under New York law, it is “limited to liability for purposeful acts aimed at dispossession of real property by someone asserting an interest therein”); Waranch v. Gulf Ins. Co., 218 Cal.App.3d 356, 266 Cal.Rptr. 827, 829 (1990) (<HOLDING>); Nichols v. Great Am. Ins. Cos., 169
holding that plaintiffs may have a property interest in real property recognizing private right of action holding that the private right of action to which tribes agreed in the compact pertains only to visitors and is inapplicable to workers compensation disputes holding that under delaware law the policys definition of personal injury as wrongful entry or eviction or other invasion of the right of private occupancy applies only to damages incurred as a result of an invasion of an interest in real property holding that under california law policy language referring to wrongful entry eviction and invasions of the right of private occupancy pertains to torts against the real property of another