B.M.B. v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “where there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the insured’s acts were ‘unintentional’ because of mental illness . . . and therefore outside the scope of an insurance policy’s intentional act 12 exclusion, the [district] court shall submit the issue to the jury”
• answering certified question by concluding that question of whether insured could form intent to injure despite mental illness must be submitted to jury
• “In such cases, the court holds as a matter of law that the insured’s conduct comes within the intentional act exclusion of a liability policy.”
• “The general rule is that intent is inferred as a matter of law when the nature and circumstances of the insured’s act are such that harm is substantially certain to result.” (quotation omitted)
• “[I]n situations where the evidence permits the trier of fact to infer that the insured did not intend his conduct to cause injury, whether the insured intended to injure his victim will be put to the trier of fact.”
• examining only the first factor

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).