Pachucki v. Republic Insurance 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 an intentional-acts exclusion precludes coverage if the insured intends one harm and a harm of a different character or magnitude occurs
• holding that an intentional-acts exclusion precludes coverage if the insured intends one harm and a harm of a different character or magnitude occurs
• finding of intent to injure affirmed where defendants intended to \sting\ plaintiff by shooting large pins propelled by rubber bands and no defendant intended the eye injury plaintiff suffered
• finding of intent to injure affirmed where defendants intended to \sting\ plaintiff by shooting large pins propelled by rubber bands and no defendant intended the eye injury plaintiff suffered
• An intentional act is a separate legal consideration and must be distinguished from the intent to cause injury.
• An intentional act is a separate legal consideration and must be distinguished from the intent to cause injury.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).