Allstate Ins. Co. v. Sowers
| Decision Date | 26 July 1989 |
| Citation | 776 P.2d 1322,97 Or.App. 658 |
| Court | Oregon Court of Appeals |
| Parties | ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, an Illinois corporation, Respondent, v. Richard David SOWERS and Swashbuckler, Inc., an Oregon corporation, Defendants, and Martin R. Rowley, Appellant. A8707-04231; CA A49276. |
James S. Coon, Portland, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the briefs was Imperati, Barnett, Sherwood & Coon, P.C., Portland.
Kim Jefferies, Portland, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were John C. Mercer, and Wood Tatum Mosser Brooke & Landis, Portland.
Before BUTTLER, P.J., and WARREN and ROSSMAN, JJ.
Rowley, a police officer, had a judgment against Sowers for an injury that he sustained when Sowers had resisted arrest. Allstate Insurance Company (Allstate) defended Sowers in that action under a reservation of rights. It then filed an action for declaratory relief, contesting coverage under Sowers' homeowner's liability policy. The trial court held that Allstate's policy does not cover the injury sustained by Rowley, and Rowley appeals. We affirm.
Rowley attempted to assist two other officers in the arrest of Sowers during an altercation at the Swashbuckler Restaurant. Sowers resisted arrest. While Rowley was holding his left wrist, Sowers broke his right arm free and swung his upper body around, striking Rowley in the face with his closed fist. Sowers was not looking at Rowley when he hit him.
On June 4, 1985, Sowers was convicted on a charge of unlawfully and intentionally resisting arrest. Later, Rowley obtained the judgment against Sowers in the damage action. In this action, Allstate argues that Rowley's injury falls within an exclusion in Sowers' homeowner's policy. The policy provides basic liability coverage:
"Allstate will pay all sums arising from an accidental loss which an insured person becomes legally obligated to pay as damages because of bodily injury or property damage covered by this part of the policy."
It also contains this exclusion:
"We do not cover any bodily injury or property damage which may reasonably be expected to result from the intentional or criminal acts of an insured person or which are in fact intended by an insured person."
The trial court held that there was no coverage for Rowley's injury.
We have not previously construed the language on which Allstate relies. According to Rowley, most instances of ordinary negligence involve "intentional * * * acts," so "accidental loss" covers injury resulting from such conduct, if the injury was unintended. 1 Read as a whole, Rowley points out, the exclusion purports to exclude any coverage, even for a loss caused by negligence. To avoid that ambiguity, he argues, the exclusion must be construed to apply only when the insured intended the harm that resulted from his act. Because Sowers did not intend to injure Rowley, he asserts, the policy covered the loss in question.
That argument ignores the relevant language of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
American Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. Hadley
...homeowner's policy did not provide coverage for a wrongful death action brought against the insured. See, also, Allstate Ins. Co. v. Sowers, 97 Or.App. 658, 776 P.2d 1322 (1989) (holding criminal acts exclusion in homeowner's policy applicable where insured unintentionally injured police of......
-
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Peasley
... ... 395, 585 A.2d 394 (1990); Steinke v. Allstate Ins. Co., 86 Ohio App.3d 798, 621 N.E.2d 1275, 1279 (disorderly conduct, a crime with recklessness as an element, triggered the exclusionary clause), review denied, 67 Ohio St.3d 1423, 616 N.E.2d 506 (1993); Allstate Ins. Co. v. Sowers, ... Page 430 ... 97 Or.App. 658, 776 P.2d 1322, 1323 (1989) (insured's resisting arrest fit the criminal acts exclusion despite insured's lack of intent to injure the officer). Contra Young v. Brown, 658 So.2d 750, 753 (La.Ct.App.) (refusing to apply Allstate's criminal acts exclusion to a ... ...
-
Chartis Prop. Cas. Co. v. Huguely
...570 A.2d 488 (1990) ; Steinke v. Allstate Ins. Co. , 86 Ohio App.3d 798, 803–04, 621 N.E.2d 1275 (1993) ; Allstate Ins. Co. v. Sowers , 97 Or.App. 658, 660–61, 776 P.2d 1322 (1989) ; Allstate Ins. Co. v. Peasley , 131 Wash.2d 420, 428–430, 932 P.2d 1244 (1997). The Young court also suggeste......
-
Swift v. Fitchburg Mut. Ins. Co.
...which he injures a police officer: did the exclusion apply where the insured did not intend the injury? See Allstate Ins. Co. v. Sowers, 97 Or.App. 658, 661, 776 P.2d 1322 (1989). There are decisions in this situation in the affirmative--this would conform to an objective reading of the wor......