In Smith v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 191 W. Va. 563, 447 S.E.2d 255 (1994) (per curiam), the policyholder and a co-worker were involved in a fist fight in the parking lot of their employer. The policyholder's liability insurance company refused to provide coverage under an intentional acts exclusion. The policyholder, however, contended "that his swing at the plaintiff was in self defense and that no bodily harm was intended." 191 W. Va. at 564, 447 S.E.2d at 256. The Court concluded that the "determination of insurance coverage depends on the resolution of factual questions concerning what happened," 191 W. Va. at 565, 447 S.E.2d at 257, and left the case to the circuit court for final resolution of those factual questions.