Guideone Elite Insurance v. Old Cutler Presbyterian Church, Inc.
420 F.3d 1317, 2005 WL 2000183, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 17616 (2005)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The interpretation of an insurance policy's exclusion clause must be determined by the plain language of the policy, and ambiguities are construed narrowly against the insurer. When a loss can be attributed to multiple causes, coverage applies as long as one of the causes is an insured risk.
Facts:
- On October 16, 2002, a woman (J.A.W.) and her two children were attacked and kidnapped from the parking lot of Old Cutler Presbyterian Church.
- The perpetrator committed multiple criminal acts including kidnapping, assault, battery, robbery, and sexual assault against J.A.W.
- The church had a commercial general liability (CGL) insurance policy with GuideOne Elite Insurance Company that included a sexual misconduct exclusion.
- The church also had a separate Sexual Misconduct Liability (SML) coverage with lower policy limits.
- GuideOne filed a declaratory judgment action seeking to limit coverage to the SML policy, arguing that all injuries arose from sexual misconduct.
- The district court granted summary judgment for GuideOne, interpreting the exclusion to apply to all acts by the perpetrator, including non-sexual acts.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a sexual misconduct exclusion in a church's insurance policy exclude coverage for injuries arising from non-sexual criminal acts committed during an incident that also involved sexual misconduct?
Opinions:
Majority - Fay (Circuit Judge)
No. The sexual misconduct exclusion does not exclude coverage for injuries arising from non-sexual acts committed during the incident. I find that the non-sexual criminal acts (kidnapping, assault, battery, robbery) did not 'arise out of' the sexual misconduct, as they are separate and distinct crimes that could have occurred without any sexual acts taking place. The plain language of the exclusion does not unambiguously exclude coverage for these non-sexual acts. Additionally, under Florida's concurrent cause doctrine, when a loss can be attributed to multiple independent causes, coverage applies as long as one of the causes is an insured risk. Here, the robbery and other non-sexual crimes were independent concurrent causes of the victims' injuries, separate from the sexual assault. Therefore, the CGL policy provides coverage for all injuries resulting from the incident, not just those limited to sexual misconduct. Furthermore, each separate criminal act constitutes an 'occurrence' under the policy, triggering the aggregate policy limit of $2 million rather than the lower per-occurrence limit. For these reasons, I reverse the district court's grant of summary judgment and remand with instructions to enter judgment in favor of the defendants, finding coverage under the CGL policy.
Analysis:
This case clarifies the application of sexual misconduct exclusions in insurance policies, particularly in complex cases involving multiple interrelated criminal acts. It underscores the necessity for clear policy language and the application of the concurrent cause doctrine when multiple independent causes contribute to a loss. The ruling may influence future interpretations of insurance coverage in similar contexts, potentially broadening coverage in cases with multiple causes of injury. The decision also reinforces Florida's approach to determining the number of occurrences in liability policies, focusing on the immediate injury-producing acts rather than the underlying negligence.
Unlock the full brief for Guideone Elite Insurance v. Old Cutler Presbyterian Church, Inc.