Posted On: December 1, 2008, 3:38 pm CST

Posted By: KentU

I am suprised that Nationwide won the prior cases. The fact that their insured was in a high speed chase from police merely increased the probability of an accident - it did not create a certainty. Their insured 'intended' to escape police - not cause an accident which would result in his capture.

I've had several customers that intentionally hit another car - one guy bragged about hitting six cars in addition to the car he was chasing. Their MVR read "Intentional collision". In those cases, coverage was denied because the accidents were truly intentional.

Does this effect coverage for insureds that cause accidents while under the influence of drugs or alcohol? The circumstances could be considered similar.

A fair ruling would be to require the insured's carrier to pay the claimant but, allow them to subrogate back to their own insured for damages - much like some pollution policies.