Court Opinion

ID: 9519731
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 01:23:59.258511+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:44:42.260396
License: Public Domain

Mr. JUSTICE THOMAS J. MORAN, specially concurring: Despite other jurisdictions holding to the contrary, I do not feel that the words “intended” and “expected” are synonymous or that they must necessarily be equated. Were they synonymous, no purpose would be served by including both within the exclusionary clause. The two words apply to situations which differ from each other in that a different degree of proof is necessary for each — a greater degree of proof being required to establish intent than to establish expectation. In the instant case, tire damages caused by the boy’s act was not accomplished by design or plan (not intended), but was of such a nature that it should have been reasonably anticipated (expected).