Jacobi v. MMG Insurance
17 A.3d 1229
| Me. | 2011Background
- Jacobi, a renter, and her daughter were subjected to sexual assaults by Bennett's son while Bennett's home was insured by MMG.
- Jacobi sued Bennett (insured by MMG) for multiple torts including emotional distress and loss of services; Bennett defaulted after MMG refused to defend due to sexual abuse exclusion.
- A damages hearing in the underlying action awarded emotional distress damages to Jacobi and her daughter, partially for eviction-related distress.
- The MMG homeowners policy provided $300,000 per occurrence for bodily injury but excluded injuries arising from sexual molestation and injuries that are expected or intended by insureds.
- An endorsement (Personal Injury Endorsement) extended the policy to cover 'personal injury' including wrongful eviction, but did not clearly cover all contested claims and did not apply to a penal-law violation by an insured.
- Jacobi sought to reach and apply the underlying judgment under 24-A M.R.S. § 2904, arguing some damages were within the policy’s scope.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the exclusion for intentional acts bar coverage for emotional distress? | Jacobi argues damages include emotional distress not excluded by policy terms. | MMG contends the intentional injury exclusion precludes coverage for emotional distress | Yes; intentional infliction exclusion bars coverage. |
| Can negligent infliction of emotional distress be recovered where an independent tort is required? | Jacobi contends an independent tort justifies NIED recovery despite sexual abuse exclusion. | MMG argues no independent tort supports NIED recovery absent an actionable independent claim not excluded. | No; no independent tort supports NIED recovery due to the sexual abuse exclusion. |
| Can wrongful eviction constitute an independent basis for recovery under the Personal Injury Endorsement? | Jacobi asserts eviction-related distress can be an actionable wrongful eviction claim. | MMG argues wrongful eviction is not pleaded as a stand-alone tort and endorsement does not extend coverage in this context. | No; eviction-based damages cannot be recovered as wrongful eviction under the endorsement in this record. |
Key Cases Cited
- Pelkey v. Gen. Elec. Capital Assur. Co., 2002 ME 142 (Me. 2002) (limits reach-and-apply recovery to damages within the policy)
- Korhonen v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2003 ME 77 (Me. 2003) (ambiguities resolved in favor of coverage; burden on claimant)
- Curtis v. Porter, 2001 ME 158 (Me. 2001) (elements of intentional infliction of emotional distress; exclusion impacts coverage)
- Hanover Ins. Co. v. Crocker, 1997 ME 19 (Me. 1997) (negligence causing bodily injury typically not 'expected or intended')
- Packard v. Central Me. Power Co., 477 A.2d 264 (Me. 1984) (principles governing recovery for emotional distress in Maine)
- McAlister v. Slosberg, 658 A.2d 658 (Me. 1995) (defaulted defendants adjudicated facts; admissible for reach-and-apply context)
- Richards v. Town of Eliot, 2001 ME 132 (Me. 2001) (by-stander and special-relationship considerations in emotional distress)