| If you are a homeowner, this may interest you.
Timothy, a 14-year-old boy, visited the home of a 15-year-old neighborhood friend, Eric. Around 11 p.m., on a dark, moonless winter night, Timothy and Eric began to shoot BBs at passing cars from a wooden platform in a tree on Eric's property. Eric's shot hit a passing Jeep, pierced its plastic window and permanently blinded the driver, Gina.
Timothy’s conduct, if committed by an adult, would have been criminal—unlawful possession of a firearm for an unlawful purpose and aggravated assault. But he was a juvenile. A court determined him to be a delinquent, imposed two years of probation, and required that he pay fines, take a gun-safety course, and perform community service.
Gina filed a civil suit because of her injuries.
YOU BE THE JUDGE: Should the homeowner’s insurance company for Eric's parents provide coverage?
The insurer believed coverage was excluded because of two standard policy clauses: 1) no coverage if the injury is the result of willful harm; and 2) no coverage if the injury results from a knowing violation of the penal law.
The court ruled that Timothy did not intend to injure Gina. Her injuries were accidental, the result of a foolish prank. And the court said the policy exclusion for violations of the penal law referred to adult, not juvenile crime.
Coverage was required.
If you would like a copy of the recent decision in Cumberland Mutual Fire Insurance Co. v. Murphy, A-46-04, please call our office. |
