Attorneys secured a reversal in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals of a district court

Attorneys secured a reversal in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals of a district court ruling that a large insurance company had a duty to defend, under an "accident" insurance policy, a lawsuit claiming that the intoxicated insured assaulted and attempted to kill the plaintiff before taking his own life.  In its precedential decision, the Court addressed "tension" in the case law regarding whether and to what extent allegations of intoxication can convert otherwise intentional conduct into an accident for purposes of securing insurance coverage.  In reconciling the two conflicting lines of cases, the Court explained that it is against public policy to extend insurance coverage to obviously intentional conduct, and it held that allegations of intoxication can create a duty to defend only when the allegations suggest that the insured was so intoxicated that he lacked conscious awareness of his actions or lacked the ability to form intent.