Ninth Circuit Confirms Intentional Acts Are Not Covered by Homeowner’s Insurance Policies

In Hansen v. Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 589 Fed. Appx. 392 (9th Cir. 2015), the Ninth Circuit confirmed that a homeowners insurance policy providing for coverage of “accidents” and excluding coverage for harm “expected or intended by the insured” does not require an insurer to provide coverage for harm resulting from intentional acts of the insured, even if the insured did not intend to cause the resulting harm.  The Ninth Circuit adopted the Nevada Supreme Court case of Vitale v. Jefferson Ins. Co. of New York, 116 Nev. 590 (Nev. 2000), which endorsed the Ninth Circuit’s interpretation of California law in Intel Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co., 952 F. 2d 1551, 1561 (9th Cir. 1991).