Allstate Insurance v. Bates

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• excluding coverage for negligent co-insureds reasoning that “[wjithout the molestation there would be no injury and thus, no basis for the negligence claim”
• rejecting Schrurn and holding that it is not the nature of the claims set forth in the complaint, but rather the nature of the injuries alleged that determines the extent of coverage
• explicitly rejecting the conclusion reached in Schrum, reasoning that “[wjithout the molestation there would be no injury and thus, no basis for the negligence claim”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).