Patrons-Oxford Mutual Insurance v. Dodge

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the issue of intent had not been decided in the prior criminal action because the defendant’s conduct could have been based on reckless behavior
• holding the clause ambiguous and to be construed against the insurer because it fails to specify whether the intent referred to is the objective intent which accompanied the immediate act of striking the blow or the \actual subjective intention\ which motivated the insured's conduct
• containing a brief history and analysis of the language in exclusion clauses such as that in the case at bench
• finding duty to defend insured against civil suit brought by victim of aggravated assault; insured's conviction could have been based on jury's determination that he acted recklessly as defined by the Maine Criminal Code

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).