PropertyCasualtyFocus

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe
You are here: Home / Archives for Intentional Acts

Intentional Acts

Intentional Accidents: California Supreme Court Announces that General Commercial Liability Policies Apply to Negligent Hiring, Training, and Supervising Claims for Failing to Prevent Intentional Torts

December 7, 2018 by D. Barret Broussard

School Construction

In a recent decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit observed that under California law, there was an unresolved question as to whether a commercial general liability (“CGL”) insurance policy covers an employer-insured for negligently failing to prevent an employee’s intentional misconduct. In essence, it was unclear whether such an incident constituted an “occurrence” that only covers “accidents,” as an intentional act cannot, by definition, be an ... Keep Reading »

Shot Through the Heart, But the Excess Carrier Isn’t to Blame: Georgia Federal Court Finds Policy’s Broad Firearms Exclusion Bars Coverage

June 16, 2017 by Christopher B. Freeman and Meredith Whigham Caiafa

On June 1, 2017, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia granted summary judgment in favor of AIG Specialty Insurance Co. in a case involving the application of the firearms exclusion in Powe v. Chartis Specialty Insurance Co., No. 1:16-CV-01336. The court dismissed the case, in which claimant Christopher Powe sought the remaining $3 million of a $4 million settlement against the insureds, property management company HMI Property Solutions, Inc. ... Keep Reading »

Blowing the Whistle on Willful Misconduct: California Court holds that False Claims Act Suits Are Uninsurable Due to Public Policy

March 31, 2017 by Daniel G. Enriquez

Willful misconduct is uninsurable. It is a fundamental principle of insurance, and it makes sense to both the lay and the lawyerly.  But few states go as far as to codify this principle in the insurance code. California is an exception. In Office Depot, Inc. v. AIG Specialty Insurance Company, Case No. 15-02416-SVW-LPRx (C.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2017), the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California held that Section 533 of California’s Insurance Code relieved ... Keep Reading »

Unlike Friendships, Policy Exclusions Are Not Severable In West Virginia

December 16, 2016 by John C. Pitblado

A homeowners insurance policy often covers every member of a family, and many policies state that the insurance applies separately to each insured. The same policies usually exclude coverage for intentional acts. But what happens when one insured is accused of negligently permitting a different, separately-covered family member to cause harm intentionally? Last month, in American National Property & Casualty Company v. Clendenen, No. 16-0290 (W. Va. Nov. 17, 2016), ... Keep Reading »

Accidentally On Purpose: Washington Court Finds Coverage For Contempt Of Court Based On “Misunderstanding”

September 30, 2015 by Stephen J. Bagge and Robert D. Helfand

Picture of Break the Rules Mural in London, England

Professional liability policies cover claims based on the insured’s alleged negligent acts, errors or omissions, and not claims for “sanctions or penalties” for “willful” professional misconduct.  But the insurer’s duty to defend is very broad.  Recently, a debtor in a bankruptcy proceeding filed a motion against the attorney for a judgment creditor, seeking to have her held in civil contempt for an allegedly “willful” violation of a discharge injunction.  In Gauthier v. ... Keep Reading »

Wait A Minute, Mr. Postman: Tenth Circuit Applies Statutory-Violation Exclusion To Junk Fax Claims That Try To Skirt The TCPA

May 22, 2015 by Jacob R. Hathorn and Robert D. Helfand

Picture of a Postman Statue

Enacted in 1991, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227  (TCPA), inaugurated the era of "junk fax" class actions, in which recipients of mass fax advertisements may pursue statutory damages of $500 per class member. Insurers responded by adding terms to liability policies that expressly exclude coverage for claims under the TCPA. But the dialectic of coverage litigation is ineluctable, and plaintiffs began asserting, in effect, that the TCPA was ... Keep Reading »

Drive, He Said: When “Yes” Means “Don’t Shoot!”

September 17, 2014 by John W. Herrington

Picture of a Shotgun Shell Ejecting

Bad things can happen to innocent people, and sometimes the people responsible for them are judgment-proof.  When that happens—and when the perpetrator also has potential coverage under an automobile or homeowners policy—victims sometimes view the circumstances of their injury more generously; they describe them with words like "careless" and "negligent" in place of harsh, judgmental terms, such as "intentional" or "criminal." Something of this sort seems to have been ... Keep Reading »

Amid Gun Frenzy, West Virginia Court Pries Coverage Issue From the Jury’s Hands

March 7, 2013 by John W. Herrington

Since President Obama called for new gun-control legislation after the Sandy Hook tragedy, sales of weapons have spiked and government officials have proposed a variety of new measures to encourage —or even mandate —gun training and ownership.  In a development that is arguably unrelated to this increase in the number of people handling firearms, accidental shootings have occurred at gun shows and ranges, in gun stores and even during gun certification training courses.  ... Keep Reading »

Federal Court Refuses to Let Insured Shoot First, Seek Coverage Later

February 20, 2013 by John C. Pitblado

at Sandy Hook Elementary School, the issue has been taken up passionately by both sides of the dispute over gun violence.  Did the murderers in Newtown and Aurora kill in large numbers because they were able to fire many shots quickly, and without reloading, as Sen. Lautenberg believes?  Or,  as a Wall Street Journal editorial recently suggested, can the proliferation of mass killings be more reasonably attributed to the practice of designating “gun-free zones” in ... Keep Reading »

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
Carlton Fields Logo
A blog focused on legal developments in the property-casualty industry by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Get Weekly Updates!

Send Me Updates!

Focused Topics

  • Additional Insured
  • Bad Faith
  • Business Interruption
  • Class Action
  • Construction/Builder’s Risk
  • Coronavirus / COVID-19
  • Cybersecurity
  • Declaratory Judgment
  • Duty to Defend
  • Environmental
  • Flood
  • Homeowners
  • Occurrence
  • Pollution/Pollutant
  • Property
  • Regulatory
  • VIEW ALL TOPICS »

Recent Articles

  • Divided Ninth Circuit Finds Claimant’s Failure to Provide Medical Records Insulates Insurer From Bad Faith Failure to Settle
  • Eighth Circuit Finds No Coverage Under “Ensuing Loss” Provision Under Arkansas Law
  • Texas Appeals Court Finds Project Owner Excluded From Coverage as Claimants’ Statutory Employer

Carlton Fields

  • carltonfields.com
  • Practices
  • Industries
  • ExpectFocus Magazine

Related Industries/Practices

  • Insurance
  • Financial Lines Insurance
  • Property & Casualty Insurance
  • Financial Services & Insurance Litigation

About PropertyCasualtyFocus

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
© 2014–2025 Carlton Fields, P.A. · Carlton Fields practices law in California as Carlton Fields, LLP · All Rights Reserved · Privacy Policy · Disclaimer

Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please contact us. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites. This site may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Web Design by Espo Digital Marketing