Clear & Unambiguous Exclusions Must Be Enforced
Post 4843
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gzjEKn4B, see the full video at https://lnkd.in/gCHvnn3v and at https://lnkd.in/gdUqKA4J and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4800 posts.
The Plaintiff insurance company seeks a declaration that it has no duty to defend or indemnify Jacob Jackson or his wife, Stacy Jackson, for claims asserted against them in civil lawsuits which allege that Mr. Jackson sexually abused and exploited minors.
In American Strategic Insurance Corp, a foreign insurer v. Jacob Jackson, individually, Inspirit Athletics, Inc, et al., No. 3:23-cv-05461-RJB, United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Tacoma (July 24, 2024) the insurer proved that criminal charges against Mr. Jackson, including for rape of a child in the third degree, child molestation in the third degree, and communication with a minor for immoral purposes are now pending in Pierce County, Washington Superior Court (“criminal case”). Trial on the criminal charges is set to begin on November 19, 2024.
The Insurer moved for partial summary judgment on its claims against Mr. and Mrs. Jackson only as they relate to Jane Doe 20, as Guardian ad Litem for John Doe 20, et. al. v. Inspirit Athletics, Inc., et.al., Pierce County, Washington Superior Court case number 23-208692-4 (“John Doe 20 lawsuit”).
FACTS
The Plaintiff issued a homeowners insurance policy (“primary policy”) to Mr. and Mrs. Jackson. This primary policy was in effect between September 16, 2019 – September 16, 2022. In addition to the primary policy, the Plaintiff also issued an umbrella liability policy to the Jacksons. The Plaintiff accepted defense of the civil lawsuit at issue for the Jacksons pursuant to a reservation of rights. It then sued seeking a declaration that it owes no duty to defend or indemnify the Jacksons for any of the claims asserted against them in the John Doe 20 lawsuit.
ALLEGATIONS IN THE UNDERLYING LAWSUIT
According to the complaint filed in the John Doe 20 lawsuit, Mr. Jackson was the head boys’ basketball coach for Sumner High School, located in Sumner, Washington, from 2016 to September of 2022. Mr. Jackson is also alleged to be the CEO of Inspirit Athletics, Inc. d/b/a/ Sterling Athletics (“Sterling”) a sports equipment manufacturing and marketing company.
The John Doe 20 lawsuit contended that Mr. Jackson met John Doe 20 when he was around 10 years old and over the next several years showered John Doe 20 with attention and gifts of athletic equipment, Sterling clothing and gear. Mr. Jackson socialized with the family. While John Doe 20 was in the Jackson’s closet, Mr. Jackson stripped naked, cornered John Doe 20 in the closet, and began masturbating in front of John Doe 20. Mr. Jackson then allegedly forced himself on John Doe 20, grabbing his genitalia and masturbating John Doe 20. The John Doe 20 lawsuit makes claims for sexual exploitation of children and false imprisonment against Mr. Jackson.
INSURANCE POLICIES
As stated above, there are two insurance policies which are the subject of this case: the primary policy and umbrella policy. Both policies exclude “‘bodily injury’ . . . arising out of sexual molestation, …” as well as “‘bodily injury’ . . . resulting from any illegal or criminal act performed by, at the direction of, or in conspiracy with any ‘insured.’ This exclusion applies regardless of whether the insured is charged with a crime.”
Relevant Umbrella Policy Provisions
The umbrella policy also contains several exclusions that the Plaintiffs maintain are relevant. For example, it excludes “‘bodily injury’ . . . and ‘personal injury’ unless such liability is also covered under the applicable underlying insurance.” The umbrella policy excludes “‘bodily injury’ which is expected or intended by an ‘insured’” and “‘bodily injury’ and ‘personal injury’ arising out of: sexual molestation, corporal punishment or mental abuse”
DISCUSSION
In Washington, an insurance policy is construed as a contract and given fair, reasonable, and sensible construction as would be given to the contract by the average person purchasing insurance.
The Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment regarding the duty to defend should be granted. The Plaintiff has no duty to defend the Jacksons in the John Doe 20 lawsuit. Neither the primary policy nor the umbrella policy (which only provides coverage if the primary policy does) could conceivably cover the allegations in the complaint.
DUTY TO INDEMNIFY
If there is no duty to defend, then there is no duty to indemnify. Therefore the Plaintiff’s partial motion for summary judgment should be granted. Plaintiff American Strategic Insurance Corp’s Motion for Summary Judgment Is Granted.
ZALMA OPINION
Liability insurance is designed to protect an insured only against fortuitous acts. Sexually molesting a child can never be fortuitous. It is an intentional act that is both immoral and illegal and excluded by clear and unambiguous language in the homeowners and umbrella policy. The couple should be forced to pay whatever assets they have to the families of the abused children as well as serve time in prison. Insurance is not designed to make it easy to commit crimes at all, and especially crimes against minor children.
(c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.
Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe or Subscribe to my substack at https://lnkd.in/gmmzUVBy
Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg
Go to X @bzalma; Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk
Happy Law Day
ZIFL – Volume 30, Issue 9 – May 1, 2026
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/zalmas-insurance-fraud-letter-may-1-2026-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-2tywc, see the video at at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
THE SOURCE FOR THE INSURANCE FRAUD PROFESSIONAL
ZIFL – Volume 30, Issue 9 – May 1, 2026
Zalma’s Insurance Fraud Letter (ZIFL) continues its 30th year of publication dedicated to those involved in reducing the effect of insurance fraud. ZIFL is published 24 times a year and is written by Barry Zalma.
DOJ Creates National Fraud Enforcement Division
Will the Feds Take on Insurance Fraud? Possibly as Part of a National Anti-Fraud Effort
On April 7, 2026, the Acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, issued a memorandum establishing the Department of Justice National Fraud Enforcement Division (NFED). The memo describes an ambitious, but perhaps redundant, vision for this ...
When Abalone Died As a Result of Multiple Causes The Efficient Proximate Cause Requires Payment
Post number 5345
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/efficient-proximate-cause-doctrine-saves-claim-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-yndlc, see the video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
In American Abalone Farms, LLC v. Star Insurance Company et al., H052643, California Court of Appeals, Sixth District (April 27, 2026) the Court of Appeals dealt with an insurance coverage issue that required application of the efficient proximate cause doctrine.
FACTS
American Abalone Farms, LLC ("American Abalone" ) operates an aquaculture farm in Santa Cruz County, California, raising abalone in tanks. In August 2020, the CZU Lightning Complex Fires led to a prolonged power outage and road closures near the farm. As a result, the farm’s water pumps failed, causing the death of most of the ...
Breach of a Specific Condition Precedent Is a Complete Defense
See the video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
In United Services Automobile Association and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Anthony Wenzell, 2026 CO 25 (Colo. Apr. 27, 2026) Anthony Wenzell was rear-ended in a car accident. He had a significant prior 2014 accident that required back surgery.
Wenzell claimed underinsured-motorist (UIM) benefits under three policies: (1) the tortfeasor’s liability policy, (2) his own primary UIM policy with State Farm, and (3) an excess UIM policy issued by USAA (under his brother’s policy, which contained an “other insurance” clause making USAA’s coverage excess over any collectible insurance).
After receiving the claims, both USAA and State Farm repeatedly requested that Wenzell execute comprehensive medical-release authorizations so they could obtain his full medical records and ...
It is Fraud to Make the Same Claim Twice
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fraud-make-same-claim-twice-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-c4g8c and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Chutzpah: After Being Paid for a New Roof Insured Makes Second Claim For Same Damages
Post number 5347
No One is Entitled to be Paid for the Same Loss Twice
In Mohammed Ali Khalili v. State Farm Lloyds, No. 14-25-00611-CV, Court of Appeals of Texas (April 30, 2026) Khalili maintained a State Farm Lloyds homeowners insurance policy for decades. In 2008 he filed a roof-damage claim; State Farm paid him to replace the entire roof (shingles and gutters). Khalili never replaced the roof and repeated his claim.
BACKGROUND
In 2021 he filed a second roof claim. State Farm’s inspectors found the roof “very old” with extensive non-storm-related damage. The claim was denied because (1) the damage did not exceed the deductible and (2) State Farm had already paid for a full roof replacement.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
State Farm filed motion for summary...
It is Fraud to Make the Same Claim Twice
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fraud-make-same-claim-twice-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-c4g8c and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Chutzpah: After Being Paid for a New Roof Insured Makes Second Claim For Same Damages
Post number 5347
No One is Entitled to be Paid for the Same Loss Twice
In Mohammed Ali Khalili v. State Farm Lloyds, No. 14-25-00611-CV, Court of Appeals of Texas (April 30, 2026) Khalili maintained a State Farm Lloyds homeowners insurance policy for decades. In 2008 he filed a roof-damage claim; State Farm paid him to replace the entire roof (shingles and gutters). Khalili never replaced the roof and repeated his claim.
BACKGROUND
In 2021 he filed a second roof claim. State Farm’s inspectors found the roof “very old” with extensive non-storm-related damage. The claim was denied because (1) the damage did not exceed the deductible and (2) State Farm had already paid for a full roof replacement.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
State Farm filed motion for summary...
What Must be Done after Notice of a Claim is Received by the Insurer
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gzvvdkMZ and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Below you will read from this post until you reach the the end of this blog post as the free part of an Excellence in Claims Handling post. To read the full article and receive all articles for members of Excellence in Claims Handling you should consider joining as a paid member to get full access to articles for members only, to our news, analysis, insurance coverage, claims, insurance fraud and insurance webinars, by clicking at the subscription link below.
A first party property policy does not insure property: it insures a person, partnership, corporation or other entity against the risk of loss of the property. Before an insured can make a claim for indemnity under a policy of first party property insurance the insured must prove that there was damage to property the risk of loss of which was insured by the policy. The obligation imposed on the insured ...
