Publications

(Article from Insurance Law Alert, July/August 2017)

For more information, please visit the Insurance Law Alert Resource Center.

The Eleventh Circuit ruled that whether an intentional act constitutes an “occurrence” under an insurance policy must be evaluated from the standpoint of the insured.  Therefore, an intentional shooting by a non-insured party may be deemed a covered occurrence if it was unexpected and unintended by the insured.  Allstate Prop. and Cas. Ins. Co. v. Roberts, 2017 WL 2683996 (11^th Cir. June 21, 2017).

The coverage dispute arose out of an intentional shooting at the home of Kim Roberts.  Her then-husband, Bobby, shot a guest.  When the guest sued Roberts for assault, she sought coverage under her homeowner’s policy, which defined “occurrence” as “an accident” that causes bodily injury.  Allstate sought a declaration that it had no duty to defend because the shooting was not accidental.  A Georgia district court agreed.  The Eleventh Circuit reversed.

Applying Georgia law, the Eleventh Circuit ruled that whether an accident occurred depends on the perspective of the insured (rather than the tortfeasor).  Thus, if the shooting was not foreseeable to Roberts, it may be deemed accidental under the policy.  The court therefore vacated the district court decision and remanded the matter for application of the correct legal standard.  The Eleventh Circuit took no position as to other possible bases for Allstate’s coverage denial, including Bobby’s potential status as an “insured person” under the policy.