Ingram v. Life Ins. Co. of Georgia

How courts have described this case

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

• evidence that assailant was shooting in insured's direction and hit insured and that third party \guessed\ the shooting was intentional held insufficient for directed verdict on intentionally inflicted wound exclusion
• evidence that assailant was shooting in insured’s direction and hit insured and that third party “guessed” the shooting was intentional held insufficient for directed verdict on intentionally inflicted wound exclusion
• similar policy exclusion for intentionally inflicted injuries
• similar policy exclusion for intentionally inflicted injuries

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).