In Allstate Ins. Co. v. Gadiel, Civ. No. 07-00565, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90923 (D. Haw. Nov. 7, 2008), the court considered whether Allstate must defend a landlord in an action filed by his tenant.
The tenant alleged assault and battery, defamation, and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress. Based on the homeowner's policy, Allstate defended under a reservation of rights, but filed an action for declaratory relief to establish there was no duty to defend. Allstate argued that because a reasonable insured would have anticipated harm resulting from intentional conduct, the conduct did not constitute an "occurrence."
The district court determined the record did not establish that the alleged injuries were a foreseeable result of the landlord's disputed conduct. The insured provided evidence that he believed the alleged defamatory statements made about the tenant were true. Consequently, at minimum there was a question of fact as to whether the allegedly defamatory statements constituted an "occurrence." Further, the policy's intentional act exclusion, excluding coverage for any bodily injury that was intended or should have been expected by the insured, did not bar coverage because there remained a question of fact as to the insured's intent regarding his conduct as alleged in the complaint.
