|
Auto-Owners Insurance Co. v. Harrington: Resisting the impulse to judicially rewrite exclusion clauses
|
I. Introduction
Individuals purchase liability insurance for one primary purpose: to shift liability to an insurer for injuries they may cause.' In order to protect themselves from liability for intentional injuries, insurance companies typically state in the policy agreement that coverage does not extend to "bodily injury . . . which is expected or intended by the insured "2 A policy with such an exclusion clause clearly does not cover injuries wrongfully caused by the intentional torts of an insured person.3 Over the past few decades, however, a more difficult issue has arisen: whether ...
Related newspaper, magazine, and trade journal articles from HighBeam Research
(Including press releases, facts, information, and biographies)
For more facts and information,
see all results