Automobile Insurance v. Cook

How courts have described this case

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

• insurer could not avail itself of exclusion for intentional acts where complaint alleged both negligence and intentional conduct
• “[E]xclusionary clauses in which the insured had little or no input are to be strictly construed against insurers.”
• “The duty of an insurer to defend its insured is ‘exceedingly broad’ and far more expansive than the duty to indemnify its insured.”
• insurer could not avail itself of intentional conduct exclusion where complaint alleged both negligence and intentional conduct
• “If, liberally construed, the claim is within the embrace of the policy,” the duty to defend applies “no matter how groundless, false or baseless the suit may be.”
• “If, liberally construed, the claim is within the embrace of the policy, the insurer must come forward to defend its insured no matter how groundless, false or baseless the suit may be.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).