Oddsen v. Henry, 878 N.W.2d 720

Jason Oddsen, a habitual polydrug user, consumed heroin, methadone, oxycodone, and alprazolam at a party and later became incoherent and unwell; he was taken to Elizabeth Henry's mother's condominium and died of acute mixed drug intoxication.
The Estate sued Henry for negligent failure to render or obtain aid; key factual dispute centers on when Henry first noticed overdose signs and how long she delayed calling 911.
State Farm, insurer under a condominium unit owners policy issued to Henry's mother, accepted Henry's defense under a reservation of rights and intervened seeking a declaratory judgment that it had no duty to defend or indemnify.
State Farm moved for summary judgment arguing no "occurrence" (accident) because Henry engaged in volitional acts leading to death and/or the intentional-acts exclusion/public policy bars coverage.
The circuit court granted summary judgment for State Farm, finding Henry's inaction was intentional and therefore not an occurrence; the majority appellate court reversed.
The appellate majority held material facts about Henry's knowledge and actions are disputed, so coverage (duty to indemnify) cannot be adjudicated as a matter of law and State Farm retains a continuing duty to defend pending resolution at trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Henry's conduct constitutes an "occurrence" (accident) triggering coverage	Estate: Henry's failure to render aid was negligent (an accident) and thus within policy coverage	State Farm: Henry's series of volitional choices and prolonged inaction were intentional (no accident) so no coverage	Reversed circuit court: disputed material facts about knowledge and delay preclude summary adjudication; coverage cannot be decided now — duty to defend continues
Whether the intentional-acts exclusion or public policy bars coverage/proximate-cause liability	Estate: No evidence Henry intended harm; exclusion inapplicable; factfinder must decide negligence vs. intent	State Farm / dissent: Public policy/proximate cause — decedent's voluntary drug use and Henry's volitional acts mean no liability and no occurrence under the policy	Majority: Public-policy and exclusion arguments turn on disputed facts; court cannot resolve them on summary judgment; State Farm retains duty to defend until facts/liability resolved

Grams v. Boss, 97 Wis. 2d 332 (procedural summary judgment standard and burden on movant)
Estate of Sustache v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co., 311 Wis. 2d 548 (insurer duty to defend generally determined by complaint; reservations of rights permit consideration of extrinsic evidence)
Olson v. Farrar, 338 Wis. 2d 215 (when insurer defends under reservation of rights, court may look beyond four-corners to decide indemnity)
Schinner v. Gundrum, 349 Wis. 2d 529 (series of intentional volitional acts can preclude finding of an "accident" under liability policy)
Liebovich v. Minnesota Ins. Co., 310 Wis. 2d 751 (intentional-acts exclusion requires intent to cause harm or substantial certainty of harm)
Stuart v. Weisflog's Showroom Gallery, Inc., 311 Wis. 2d 492 (accident inquiry focuses on whether causal conduct was accidental)
Fandrey v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co., 272 Wis. 2d 46 (public policy / proximate cause considerations may bar liability in extreme cases)