Ross v. Home Ins. Co.

Ross v. Home Ins. Co.

Opinion

 [*469]   [**655]  Nadeau, J. The plaintiff, Clifford J. Ross, appeals an order of the Superior Court (Groff, J.) granting summary judgment to the defendant, The Home Insurance Company  [**656]  (Home). The plaintiff also appeals from the trial court's denial of certain discovery requests and its award of attorney's fees. We affirm.

 [*470]  The relevant facts follow. The plaintiff, an attorney, employed his son, David Ross, as an attorney in his firm in Manchester. On January 13, 1995, June L., a client of the firm, filed a two count writ, alleging [***2]  that on July 19, 1993, David summoned her to his office after hours to sign some papers, and then raped her in the firm's offices. On June 5, 1996, June L. moved to amend the writ. The amended writ alleged the rape was a breach of David's fiduciary duty as an attorney (count I) and that the plaintiff was negligent for hiring and failing to supervise him (count II). The plaintiff settled this suit for $ 1.5 million.

During the relevant period, the plaintiff owned consecutive professional liability insurance policies issued by Home. The first policy ran from November 13, 1992, through November 13, 1993; the second from November 13, 1993, through November 13, 1994.

The 1992-1993 policy covers certain liabilities

arising out of personal injury or any act or omission of the Insured in rendering or failing to render professional services for others . . . in the Insured's capacity as a lawyer, and caused by the Insured or any other person for whose acts or omissions the Insured is legally responsible, except as excluded or limited by the terms of this Policy.

The policy excludes "any claim arising out of any criminal or malicious act. " It also does not apply "to [***3]  any claim arising out of bodily injury to or sickness, disease, or death of any person."

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