Rogers v. Allstate Ins. Co.
| Docket Number: | 2004-CA-02074-COA Linked Case(s): 2004-CT-02074-SCT2004-CA-02074-COA |
|
| Oral Argument: | 11-22-2005 | |
* This video is best viewed in the most current version of Google Chrome, Internet Explorer with Windows Media Player plug-in, or Safari (Mac Users). |
||
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 02-21-2006 Opinion Author: Ishee, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Insurance - Duty to defend - Accident Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Southwick, Irving, Chandler, Griffis, Barnes and Roberts, JJ. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - INSURANCE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-07-2004 Appealed from: Harrison County Circuit Court Judge: Robert H. Walker Disposition: SUMMARY JUDGMENT ENTERED IN FAVOR OF ALLSTATE. Case Number: A2402-1999-00220 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Rhonda M. Rogers |
AUSTIN R. NIMOCKS |
||
| Appellee: | Allstate Insurance Company | ERIC JOSEPH DILLON, WILLIAM C. GRIFFIN |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Insurance - Duty to defend - Accident |
| Summary of the Facts: | Allstate Insurance Company filed a complaint for declaratory judgment seeking a determination that Allstate had no duty under a homeowner’s policy to defend or indemnify Rhonda Rogers in an ongoing lawsuit. Allstate subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment which the court granted, finding that there was no coverage available under Rogers’ homeowner’s policy. Rogers appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | The test for determining whether the insurer has an obligation to defend is accomplished by examining the allegations in the complaint or the declaration in the underlying action. Rogers argues that her actions qualified as an occurrence both under the terms of the policy and as defined by Mississippi law. In order for coverage to exist, the triggering event must be an “occurrence,” which is defined by the Allstate policy as an “accident.” By its very nature, an accident is something that produces unexpected and unintended results. A claim resulting from intentional conduct which causes foreseeable harm is not covered, even where the actual injury or damages are greater than expected or intended. Here, Rogers consciously and purposely set the chain of events in motion when she initiated a letter-writing campaign against Dr. Gasparrini. Although she might not have specifically intended for Dr. Gasparrini to suffer financial loss, she admitted that her purpose in the mailing the letters was to prevent others from suffering as she did. Rogers desired to cause the consequences of her actions, namely, harm to Dr. Gasparrini’s business relationships. Her actions were not covered under the policy, as they did not constitute an accident. In addition, coverage would not exist under the homeowner’s policy because Dr. Gasparrini did not claim as damages any type of bodily injury or property damage. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
