Intentional Injury Exclusion

16 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Fed. Ins. Co. v. Allan H. Applestein & the Allan H. Applestein Found. Tr. & Robert Mackin
  377 So. 2d 229· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-11-20 ·cited 78×
  Federal Insurance Company appealed summary judgments requiring it to defend and provide coverage for an intentional tort action against its insureds. The court held that the plaintiff's complaint allegations of malice and intent to harm triggered the policy's intentional injury e
• Hartford Fire Ins. Co. & St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Spreen
  343 So. 2d 649· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-03-01 ·cited 68×
  Hartford Fire and St. Paul Fire appealed summary judgments requiring them to cover damages from an assault and battery committed by their insured, Donald Spreen. The court held that Hartford's homeowner's liability policy, which covers only 'accidents' and excludes intentional in
• Cloud v. Shelby Mut. Ins. Co. of Shelby
  248 So. 2d 217· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-05-18 ·cited 54×
  The court held that an intentional act does not necessarily exclude coverage if the injury was not intentionally caused, and a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding the insured's intent to cause harm.
• Farm Bureau Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Hammer
  177 F.2d 793· 4th Cir.· 1949-10-03 ·cited 51×
  An insurer is bound by a judgment against its insured on issues actually adjudicated in the underlying suit, even if the insurer believes the liability was based on different grounds.
• The AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Hanna
  224 F.2d 499· 5th Cir.· 1955-06-30 ·cited 27×
  An insurer's obligation to pay damages under a liability policy does not extend to the costs of complying with a mandatory injunction or the expenses of litigating such an action, especially when the policy excludes intentionally caused injury and the insured breaches notice prov
• Emp'rs Commercial Union Ins. Co. of Am. v. Charles A. Kottmeier, M.D.
  323 So. 2d 605· Fla. 2d DCA· 1975-12-19 ·cited 26×
  Employers Commercial Union Insurance Company appeals from an order requiring it to provide coverage and defense for a slander suit against its insured, Dr. Kottmeier. The court held that the insurance policy covers defamatory statements unless made with actual malice, not merely
• State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Marshall
  554 So. 2d 504· Fla.· 1989-12-21 ·cited 24×
  State Farm sought declaratory relief to determine whether its homeowner's liability insurance policy excluded coverage for Marshall's intentional shooting of Bailey in self-defense. The Florida Supreme Court held that intentional act exclusions in insurance policies bar coverage
• Swindal v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co.
  599 So. 2d 1314· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-04-10 ·cited 12×
  Swindal and Castellano appealed a summary judgment in favor of Prudential Insurance that denied coverage for Swindal's injuries under an intentional acts exclusion in Castellano's homeowners policy. The court reversed because a genuine dispute of fact exists about whether Castell
• Harbin v. Assurance Co. OF Am.
  308 F.2d 748· 10th Cir.· 1962-08-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the insurer has no duty to defend a suit alleging intentional injury, but the judgment should not preclude coverage if facts later establish unintentional conduct.
• Cabezas v. Fla. Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co.
  830 So. 2d 156· Fla. 3d DCA· 2002-10-09 ·cited 9×
  Israel Cabezas appeals a summary judgment that dismissed his case against Helms and Farm Bureau's homeowners insurance policy. The court affirmed, holding that Helms' intentional punch to Cabezas' head fell within the insurance policy's intentional acts exclusion, regardless of w
• Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. Cooper
  378 So. 2d 806· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-12-11 ·cited 4×
  Colonial Life appeals a summary judgment requiring it to pay accidental death benefits under a policy insuring Clarence Cooper, who died from injuries sustained when he deliberately jumped from a roof with the specific intention of injuring himself to support a lawsuit. The court
• W. World Ins. Co., Inc. v. Cigna Corp.
  718 F. Supp. 1518· S.D. Fla.· 1989-08-28 ·cited 2×
  Aetna/Cigna had no duty to defend Collier County in the underlying lawsuits because the complaints alleged intentional harm, falling outside the policy's 'occurrence' definition, and in one case, a 'non-party' contract exclusion applied.
• State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Pickard
  849 F.2d 1220· 9th Cir.· 1988-06-20 ·cited 2×
  State Farm's homeowner's policy does not cover emotional harm to a household member, even if the harm is caused by intentional acts.
• N.H. Indem. Co. v. Scott
  407 F. Supp. 2d 1142· M.D. Fla.· 2012-12-13
  The court held that the insurance policy's 'auto accident' coverage does not extend to intentional criminal acts like robbery and battery, and the exclusion for intentionally caused bodily injury applies.
• Balboa Ins. Co. v. Pecola Floyd and Joseph Sawyer
  262 So. 2d 202· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-05-16
  Balboa Insurance appealed a summary judgment finding coverage under a homeowners liability policy for a death caused when the insured intentionally fired a gun at one person but accidentally struck and killed a bystander. The court reversed, holding that whether the killing was i
• Zimmerman v. Am. Cas. Co. of Reading
  12 Fla. Supp. 50· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1958-02-27
  An insurance company refused to defend its insured against an assault and battery claim, arguing the complaint's allegations showed intentional injury excluded by the policy. The court held that the face allegations of the complaint determine the insurer's duty to defend, regardl