People v. Asaro

How courts have described this case

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

• inferring intent to harm in case of six year-old and nine year-old victims where New York law prohibited deviate sexual intercourse with children under eleven years of age
• approving of the insurer’s argument that, in a case of child molestation, “cause and effect cannot be separated; that to do the act is necessarily to do the harm which is its consequence”
• determining, in the context of sexual molestation claims, that the injuries were “intentionally caused”
• cause and effect inseparable in act of child molestation; to do the act is essentially to do the resulting harm
• because injuries were intentionally caused by one designated as \an\ insured person, coverage of another family member is excluded
• the majority rule \finds support in logic and in the generally accepted conception of harm as being inherent in the act of sexually abusing a child\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).