An assault exclusion can reach a negligent-premises claim
Calling a claim negligent security or poor premises management did not avoid an assault-and-battery exclusion. The court said the claim depended on the assault, so the exclusion applied under this policy. Read the exclusion and the facts behind the claim, not just the lawsuit’s label.
Record details
| Record | Mount Vernon Fire Insurance Co. v. Creative Housing Ltd., 88 N.Y.2d 347 (1996) |
|---|---|
| Type | Court decision |
| Status | Final public record |
| Jurisdiction | New York |
| Forum | New York Court of Appeals |
| Docket or order number | 88 N.Y.2d 347 |
| Decision date | |
| Official record | Read the public record |
The public record
In Mount Vernon Fire Insurance Co. v. Creative Housing Ltd., the New York Court of Appeals answered certified insurance-coverage questions from the Second Circuit. The official opinion is the source for this case file. This page reports the court’s coverage holding; it does not recreate the underlying injury action or decide coverage under another policy.
What was alleged
The opinion states that an individual was criminally assaulted in an apartment building. She sued the owner and manager, alleging negligent supervision, management, and control of the premises. The owner sought a defense and indemnity under a liability policy whose assault-and-battery exclusion applied to a claim, demand, or suit “based on” assault and battery.
Those are allegations and policy terms as described in the court’s opinion. They are not a finding here about an insured business, a bar, or a landlord.
The court’s holding
The Court of Appeals answered both certified questions for the insurer. It held that “based on” and “arising out of,” when used in the exclusion before it, were legally indistinguishable and unambiguous. It also held that, where a third party committed the assault, the basis of the victim’s negligent failure-to-maintain-safe-premises claim against the insured was the assault.
The decision did not say that every negligence allegation connected to violence is excluded. It decided the quoted exclusion and the New York law before the court.
Why this record matters
For a bar, venue, landlord, or contractor, a complaint may be framed as negligent security, supervision, or premises management. That label alone does not identify the coverage outcome. Read the operative exclusion, the allegations, and the governing jurisdiction together. The record is useful because it separates the liability theory from the policy language that may control the insurer’s defense obligation.
See assault-and-battery coverage for bars for the liability buying question. The official court record is linked below.
Sources
- Primary source: Mount Vernon Fire Insurance Co. v. Creative Housing Ltd. — New York Court of Appeals — Published Court of Appeals decision answering certified questions about an assault-and-battery exclusion.