Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-02094/USCOURTS-ca10-89-02094-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Teresa Garvey
Appellant
Life Insurance Company of North America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

·TENTH CIRCUIT 

TERESA GARVEY, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

FI LED 

Unire<l States Court of AppealM 

JAN 1 G 1990 

.ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

v. No. 89-2094 

LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF 

NORTH AMERICA, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

(D.C. No. CV 87-1464-JP) 

(D. N.M.) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before SEYMOUR, TACHA, and EBEL, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

This appeal is from an order of the district court dismissing 

plaintiff's claim for declaratory relief seeking accidental death 

benefits under a life insurance policy issued by defendant. After 

a trial on the merits, the district court held that decedent's 

death was not accidental within the meaning of the policy and 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 89-2094 Document: 01019960722 Date Filed: 01/16/1990 Page: 1 
therefore that plaintiff was not entitled to benefits thereunder. 

We affirm. 

This case arose out of a tragic shooting incident in which 

plaintiff's husband was killed after he approached and entered the 

home of a next door neighbor in the early morning hours while 

carrying a cocked gun. · Plaintiff's decedent was killed by the 

neighbor. Plaintiff alleges that the district court erted by 

applying the wrong legal standard to the determination of whether 

the death was accidental and further that the evidence was not 

sufficient to support the determination of the trial court. The 

district court held as a matter of law that a death is not 

accidental if the insured or a reasonably prudent person in the 

insured's position could reasonably foresee that death could 

_result from the insured's conduct. The district court found that 

it should have been reasonably foreseeable to a person in the 

position of the insured that, under the circumstances of this 

case, defensive actions by the neighbor could cause the death of 

the insured. We find no error in the district court's application 

of the reasonable foreseeability standard. We further find ample 

evidence to support the district court's determination that the 

death was not accidental. 

AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-2-

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Deanell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 89-2094 Document: 01019960722 Date Filed: 01/16/1990 Page: 2