State Farm Insurance v. Bruns

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that coverage was excluded for false imprisonment claim under New Hampshire law because the facts underlying the false imprisonment claim were “so dependent upon the facts of the sexual assaults, the claims [could] not be separated”
• reasoning that the scope of a liability policy's coverage should be determined based upon the policy language and the facts pled in the underlying suit rather than the legal nomenclature that the plaintiff used to frame the suit
• “Where the facts reveal that potentially covered acts are inextricably intertwined with and dependent upon the commission of uncovered acts, an insurer will not be required to defend.”
• “In deciding the scope of a liability policy's coverage, a court must compare the policy language with the facts pled in the underlying suit to see if the claim falls within the express terms of the policy . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).