2015 Ohio 316
Ohio Ct. App.2015Background
- On Aug. 17–18, 2010, Julius Lyles pursued a group of boys after his son’s bicycle was reported stolen; Lyles followed and struck Kenshawn Cummings’ bicycle, causing serious injury.
- Lyles pleaded guilty to felonious assault (a crime defined by "knowingly" causing serious physical harm) and received a prison term.
- Kenshawn’s mother sued Lyles for damages; GEICO, Lyles’s insurer, intervened seeking a declaratory judgment that its policy’s intentional-act exclusion bars coverage for the incident.
- GEICO moved for summary judgment, submitting police records and depositions of two neutral eyewitnesses who testified Lyles backed up, then drove over a curb and across a lawn at speed without braking before striking the bicycle.
- Lyles testified in deposition that he only intended to scare and stop the boy and that the collision was accidental; the trial court granted GEICO’s motion and denied plaintiff’s motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Lyles’s guilty plea to felonious assault and the record preclude insurance coverage under the policy’s intentional-act exclusion | Lyles (via plaintiff) says he lacked intent to injure; his deposition recants the criminal admission and claims the collision was accidental | GEICO says the guilty plea to a crime requiring a "knowing" mental state creates a strong presumption that the bodily injury was expected or intended, and neutral eyewitness testimony corroborates intentional conduct | Court held for GEICO: guilty plea creates a strong rebuttable presumption of intent and plaintiff failed to rebut it given eyewitness testimony; summary judgment for GEICO affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Allstate Ins. Co. v. Campbell, 128 Ohio St.3d 186 (Ohio 2010) (public policy and common law disfavor insurance coverage for intentional criminal acts)
- Preferred Risk Ins. Co. v. Gill, 30 Ohio St.3d 108 (Ohio 1987) (criminal conviction can establish intent for an intentional-act exclusion)
- Nearor v. Davis, 118 Ohio App.3d 806 (Ohio Ct. App.) (conviction/admission can supply intent for exclusion)
- Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Machniak, 74 Ohio App.3d 638 (Ohio Ct. App.) (felonious assault involves "knowing" rather than "purposely," but facts may preclude conclusive intent finding)