Country Mutual Ins. Co. v. Orloske, No. 15-1097 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseAfter Eric Orloske shot his brother, Brian, to death after Eric tripped and fell down the stairs in his home while holding a loaded shotgun, the trustee for Brian's next of kin filed a wrongful death suit against Eric. At issue in this appeal is whether Country Mutual's homeowner's policy, which covered Eric's home, provided coverage for Brian's death. The court concluded that the district court correctly determined that Minnesota's reasonable-expectations doctrine is inapplicable in this case and correctly granted summary judgment to Country Mutual.The doctrine forces insurers to communicate the coverage and exclusions of their policies clearly; it is not a means of avoiding unambiguous policy language. Here, the policy expressly listed the criminal-acts exclusion - Eric had pleaded guilty to manslaughter for Brian's death - in the exclusion section of the policy between exclusions related to controlled substances and pollution. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Smith, Author, with Bye and Benton, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Insurance. The criminal act exclusion in the policy at issue was not covered by Minnesota's reasonable-expectations doctrine as the language in the policy was unambiguous and clearly did not cover injury arising from a criminal act; an insured would not expect a criminal shooting to be covered.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.