Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Minn. Fire & Cas. Co. v. Greenfield

Minn. Fire & Cas. Co. v. Greenfield

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

December 2, 2003, Argued ; August 19, 2004, Decided

No. 68 MAP 2003

Opinion

 [*336]   [**856]  OPINION ANNOUNCING THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

MADAME JUSTICE NEWMAN

We must decide today whether an insurance company owes a duty to defend or indemnify a homeowner for the wrongful death of his houseguest occasioned by his selling heroin to her. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the holding of the Superior Court, albeit on different grounds, that no such obligation exists.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

At 8 p.m. on February 9, 1998, eighteen year-old Angela Smith (Smith) arrived at the home of Michael J. Greenfield (Greenfield) at 600 North Third Street, in Wormleysburg, hoping to obtain [***2]  some heroin from him. Another young woman, Brook Broadwater (Broadwater), was with Smith. When they arrived, Greenfield had been drinking Mad Dog beer and was under the influence of marijuana and heroin.

 [*337]  Greenfield was no stranger to the use of heroin, 1 having lost consciousness three times from it in the past. Original Record (Record), Deposition Testimony of Michael J. Greenfield, December 13, 2000 (Greenfield Deposition), at 120-21. He was using heroin on a daily basis. Id. at 147. He had used heroin with Smith before, and she, too, had become unconscious twice from it. Id. at 121-22. Greenfield had sold heroin to Smith on other occasions and was arrested in 1995 for possession of marijuana. Id. at 124. Greenfield acknowledged that he sold drugs out of his house "occasionally;" for the most part, he  [**857]  sold "mostly just weed" and "didn't really sell heroin to too many people." Id. at 141-42.

 [***3]  In exchange for some marijuana and a small sum of money, Greenfield provided Smith with a bag of heroin, which was labeled "Suicide." At approximately 8:20 p.m., Smith voluntarily injected herself with the heroin. From that time until 10 p.m., Smith lay in a chair and communicated only when directly addressed. Greenfield put out some blankets for her, and she went to sleep on the floor. Greenfield left with Broadwater, returning to the house approximately 10:45 p.m. Id. at 131. Smith remained in the residence, and when Greenfield awoke around 6:30 a.m., he found Smith still on the floor. Id. at 132. When he left for work, he told Smith to lock the door if she left, and Smith groggily responded. Id.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

579 Pa. 333 *; 855 A.2d 854 **; 2004 Pa. LEXIS 1926 ***

MINNESOTA FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Appellee v. MICHAEL J. GREENFIELD, SHARON SMITH AND ARLIN C. SMITH, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ADMINISTRATORS OF THE ESTATE OF ANGELA C. SMITH, Appellants

Prior History:  [***1]  Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court entered August 9, 2002 at No. 651MDA2001 which Reversed and Remanded the Judgment of Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas, Civil Division, entered March 14, 2001 at No. 00-3886- EQUITY. 2002 PA Super 260, 805 A.2d 622 (Pa. Super. 2002).

 Minn. Fire & Cas. Co. v. Greenfield, 2002 PA Super 260, 805 A.2d 622, 2002 Pa. Super. LEXIS 2442 (Pa. Super. Ct., 2002)

Disposition: Affirmed.

CORE TERMS

heroin, insured, public policy, coverage, insurance company, inferred intent, trial court, cases, indemnify, occurrence, controlled substance, exclusion clause, bodily injury, damages, summary judgment, reasons, sexual, inferred, homeowner's policy, insurance contract, property damage, duty to defend, matter of law, criminal act, homeowner's, injected, insurance policy, allegations, narcotic, insurance coverage

Civil Procedure, Summary Judgment, Motions for Summary Judgment, General Overview, Judgments, Appellate Review, Standards of Review, Appeals, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Contracts Law, Defenses, Ambiguities & Mistakes, Insurance Law, Policy Interpretation, Ambiguous Terms, Construction Against Insurers, Claim, Contract & Practice Issues, Question of Law, Reviewability of Lower Court Decisions, Preservation for Review, Criminal Law & Procedure, Homicide, Manslaughter & Murder, Involuntary Manslaughter, Elements, Property Insurance, Homeowners Insurance, Sexual Assault, Abuse of Children, Crimes Against Persons, Sex Crimes, Education Law, Student Discipline, Misconduct, Sexual Misconduct, Commercial General Liability Insurance, Exclusions, Intentional Acts, Controlled Substances, Delivery, Distribution & Sale, Stolen Property, Receiving Stolen Property