Rosas v. Eyre

In Rosas v. Eyre, 2003 UT App 414, 82 P.3d 185, the court of appeals held that an insurer had no duty to defend an assault claim brought against its insured where the insured's child allegedly attacked a disabled classmate and knocked him out of his wheelchair. Id. Although the complaint contained an allegation that the plaintiff's injuries were "a direct and proximate result of the defendant's wrongful acts, omissions, negligence and recklessness," id. the court reasoned that the insurer had no duty to defend because "the facts alleged in the complaint clearly demonstrate that a cause of action based solely on an intentional tort was intended." Id.