Intentional Acts Exclusion

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal’s opinion this week in Streit v. Metropolitan Casualty Insurance Company,1 is a major victory for policyholders in Illinois. There, the Seventh Circuit affirmed the lower court judgment entered in favor of my clients, Wesley and Barbara Streit, arising out of Metropolitan’s failure to cover a fire loss to their residence in Illinois. The Seventh Circuit’s ruling establishes that an insurance policy exclusion which precludes innocent co-insureds from recovering violates the minimum level of protection afforded by the Illinois Standard Fire Policy.
Continue Reading

Part three of my series covering the Intentional Acts Exclusion brings us to Connecticut. To understand how Connecticut approaches this subject you will have to understand the legal term dictum. Dictum (or dicta for plural) is Latin for “remark” and is defined as a comment by a judge in a decision or ruling not required to reach the decision, but may state a related legal principle as the judge understands it. While it may be cited in legal argument, it does not have the full force of a precedent since the comment was not part of the legal basis for judgment.


Continue Reading