The court held that the policy’s assault, battery or physical altercation exclusion applied and that there was no coverage for appellants’ claims against the insured because the insured’s bodyguard had allegedly assaulted the appellant.

The claims against the insured arose out of the assault and battery allegedly committed by the insured’s security guard. In the underlying state court action, the claimants alleged that the insured knew or should have known of the bodyguard’s violent tendencies and had negligently employed him as a security guard. Burlington Insurance Company subsequently filed a declaratory judgment action in federal court. The trial court ruled that the assault, battery or physical altercation exclusion applied and that there was no coverage for the appellants’ claims against the insured. The 11^th Circuit Court agreed and ruled that the district court had properly found that there were no disputed issues of fact regarding the content of the policy and that the insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify.

Case Law Alerts, 3rd Quarter, July 2014