This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: hazard clause did not cause the damage to the insured's property. 23. In all likelihood, King will neither be obligated to defend Portly in the battery case nor be required to pay out damages awarded to Boorish. Liability insurance policies normally do not furnish the insured coverage for wrongful intentional conduct such as battery. In order to be safe and to insulate itself against possible breach of contract claims by Portly, King may be likely to file a declaratory judgment action in which it asks the court to rule that its policy does not apply to the Portly-Boorish incident. Business Law and the Regulatory Environment, 11E 89 Answers to Student Study Guide and Workbook Questions 90...
View Full Document
- Spring '09