Mt. Vernon Fire Insurance v. Dobbs
873 F. Supp. 2d 762
N.D.W. Va.2012Background
- Mt. Vernon issued a commercial liability policy to Enoch’s LLC, d/b/a Trophy Club.
- Dobbs’ underlying state-court complaint (Dec 14, 2008) alleged assault by Fisher and Worries, agents of Enoch’s LLC.
- Mt. Vernon sought declaratory relief that it has no duties to defend/indemnify any defendants in the state action.
- Fisher and Worries, and Enoch’s LLC were defaulted in this action; Worries is not insured.
- Policy defines occurrence as an accident and includes explicit assault/battery exclusions and a failure-to-protect exclusion.
- Court grants summary judgment that Mt. Vernon has no duty to defend/indemnify or cover punitive damages; action dismissed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Duty to defend/indemnify for assault/battery | Mt. Vernon argues assault/battery exclusions apply. | Dobbs contends coverage may apply if injuries were accidental. | No duty to defend or indemnify; assault/battery exclusion controls. |
| Negligence vs. intentional acts in Dobbs’ claims | Claims framed as negligence are still within battery/intentional-exclusion. | Dobbs pleads negligence to avoid exclusion. | Negligence claims effectively allege intentional acts and are excluded. |
| Duty regarding punitive damages coverage | Policy does not cover punitive damages. | Punitive damages should be within coverage if other elements are. | Policy excludes punitive damages; no coverage for punitive damages. |
Key Cases Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (U.S. 1986) (burden-shifting standard for summary judgment)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (U.S. 1986) (summary judgment evidence must show genuine disputes of fact)
- Smith v. Animal Urgent Care, Inc., 208 W.Va. 664 (W. Va. 2000) (negligence claims cannot bypass intentional-act exclusions)