Graves v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 07 October 1987 |
| Citation | 745 S.W.2d 282 |
| Parties | Curtis GRAVES, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | Tennessee Court of Appeals |
John Alley, Chattanooga, for plaintiffs-appellants.
Phillip A. Fleissner and Christopher H. Steger, Fleissner, Cooper & Marcus, Chattanooga, for defendant-appellee.
Plaintiffs appeal from summary judgment entered by the trial court that defendant, under the terms of plaintiffs' homeowner's policy, was not required to defend plaintiffs in a third party's action for damages allegedly due to plaintiffs' assault and battery.
The trial judge, relying on First National Bank v. South Carolina Ins. Co., 207 Tenn. 520, 341 S.W.2d 569 (1960), determined from the allegations in the third party's action against insured that the insurer had no duty to defend that action.
The pertinent allegations of the third party's complaint are:
On or about June 16, 1984, as Herman Nance was trimming hedges owned and maintained by the Green Forest Community Club at the entranceway to the Green Forest subdivision, he was verbally attacked and cursed by Curtis Graves and wrongfully accused of having cut the hedges which Graves claims are on his property. After Nance denied that he had clipped Graves' hedges, and after a neighbor, Warren Logan, had admitted cutting Graves' hedges and had apologized to Graves for having cut Graves' hedges, Curtis Graves suddenly attacked and physically beat Herman Nance. After Graves stopped attacking Nance and Nance was preparing to leave the scene, defendant Margarete Graves appeared on the scene and also began verbally attacking and cursing Herman Nance. Curtis Graves then resumed his physical attack on Herman Nance, grabbing him around the upper body, pushing Nance against a stop sign, and covering Nance's nose and mouth with his hand, attempting to suffocate Nance. While Nance was in this defenseless position, defendant Margarete Graves began to beat Herman Nance on the head and back with her fists and with a needle. It is averred that this unprovoked assault and battery by the defendants upon Herman Nance resulted in personal injuries to Herman Nance, for which the defendants are liable at law.
While admitting First National Bank limits inquiry required of the insurer to the claim set forth in the pleadings, plaintiffs argue events subsequent to that decision require some modification of the rule, pointing to the change in policy language and the advent of notice pleadings.
The near universal rule is the obligation of an insurance company under a policy...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
American Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. Pacchetti, No. 73041
...445, 332 N.E.2d 240 (1975); Tal v. Franklin Mut. Ins. Co., 172 N.J.Super. 112, 410 A.2d 1194 (1980); Graves v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 745 S.W.2d 282 (Tenn.Ct.App.1987). Although this Court has never expressly addressed the rule adopted in these other jurisdictions, the rule is not inco......
-
Massachusetts Bay Ins. Co. v. Vic Koenig Leasing, Inc.
...have enforced similar exclusionary provisions when an insurer refused to defend its insured. See, e.g., Graves v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 745 S.W.2d 282, 284 (Tenn.Ct.App.1987) ("We believe the exclusion is applicable if bodily injury is 'intended or expected' by the insured where the i......
-
Tennessee Farmers Mut. Ins. Co. v. Evans
...inflicted to result from his intentional act of firing the weapon." Allstate, 772 S.W.2d at 912. However, in Graves v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 745 S.W.2d 282 (Tenn.App.1987), the court found that an exclusion for intentional or expected acts applied where the insured committed an assaul......
- Lions Head Homeowners' Ass'n v. Metropolitan Bd. of Zoning Appeals