ILNews

Judges affirm insurer has no duty to defend

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Court of Appeals agreed with the trial court that a homeowner’s insurance policy is clear that the ingestion of methadone by a guest at his house and his subsequent injuries are excluded from the policy’s liability coverage.

This is the second time Phillip Forman v. Wayne Penn, Lisa Orr, Bradley Orr, and Christopher Green/Phillip Forman, Wayne Penn, Lisa Orr, and Bradley Orr v. Western Reserve Mutual Casualty Co., No. 33A01-1007-CT-343, has made it to the Court of Appeals. The first time, the judges dismissed the appeal because they found the summary judgment order in favor of Western Reserve Mutual Casualty Co. wasn’t final or appealable.

The trial court has since certified its ruling for discretionary interlocutory appeal and the Court of Appeals granted Wayne Penn and Bradley Orr’s petition for rehearing and heard the interlocutory appeal.

At issue is whether Penn’s insurer, Western Reserve, has a duty to defend Penn, Lisa Orr, and her son Bradley in Phillip Forman’s lawsuit. While spending the night at Penn and Orr’s home – which is only owned and insured by Penn – Forman, who was 17 at the time, took some of Orr’s prescribed methadone and had to be hospitalized. He now has permanent injuries. He claimed Orr’s then-teenage son Bradley gave him the drug. Forman sued alleging negligent supervision and control over the methadone and negligence in caring for him after it was discovered he couldn’t be wakened in the morning and had to be hospitalized.

The trial court granted summary judgment for the insurer, finding that the policy’s exclusion for claims “arising out of the use, sale, manufacture, delivery, transfer, or possession by any person of [a Schedule II Controlled Substance]” precluded the insurer from defending Penn and Bradley.

The Court of Appeals affirmed that Western Reserve had no duty to defend the appellants because the incident was excluded from liability coverage under the policy. Penn, Orr, and Bradley argue the exclusion doesn’t apply because Orr’s possession and use of the drug was legitimate. But Forman’s injury arose from his use of the methadone, which wasn’t a legitimate use of the drug under a doctor’s prescription, wrote Judge John Baker.

“We sympathize with the Appellants’ argument that they are entirely innocent of any connection between Forman and his decision to steal and consume Lisa’s methadone,” he wrote. “We acknowledge that the Appellants justifiably believe that Western Reserve should defend them under these circumstances. Unfortunately for the Appellants, the language of the policy is clear and unambiguous that Forman’s injury, which arose out of his illicit use of a controlled substance, is excluded from liability coverage.”
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Can I get this form on line,if not where can I obtain one. I am eligible.

  2. What a fine example of the best of the Hoosier tradition! How sad that the AP has to include partisan snark in the obit for this great American patriot and adventurer.

  3. Why are all these lawyers yakking to the media about pending matters? Trial by media? What the devil happened to not making extrajudicial statements? The system is falling apart.

  4. It is a sad story indeed as this couple has been only in survival mode, NOT found guilty with Ponzi, shaken down for 5 years and pursued by prosecution that has been ignited by a civil suit with very deep pockets wrenched in their bitterness...It has been said that many of us are breaking an average of 300 federal laws a day without even knowing it. Structuring laws, & civilForfeiture laws are among the scariest that need to be restructured or repealed . These laws were initially created for drug Lords and laundering money and now reach over that line. Here you have a couple that took out their own money, not drug money, not laundering. Yes...Many upset that they lost money...but how much did they make before it all fell apart? No one ask that question? A civil suit against Williams was awarded because he has no more money to fight...they pushed for a break in order...they took all his belongings...even underwear, shoes and clothes? who does that? What allows that? Maybe if you had the picture of him purchasing a jacket at the Goodwill just to go to court the next day...his enemy may be satisfied? But not likely...bitterness is a master. For happy ending lovers, you will be happy to know they have a faith that has changed their world and a solid love that many of us can only dream about. They will spend their time in federal jail for taking their money from their account, but at the end of the day they have loyal friends, a true love and a hope of a new life in time...and none of that can be bought or taken That is the real story.

  5. Could be his email did something especially heinous, really over the top like questioning Ind S.Ct. officials or accusing JLAP of being the political correctness police.

ADVERTISEMENT