Marshall Schinner v. Michael Gundrum

¶ 98. (dissenting). I agree with the majority when it holds that the determination of what constitutes an "occurrence" under the insurance policy is to he analyzed from the standpoint of the insured, not the injured party. Majority op., ¶ 52. I part ways with the majority, however, when it fails to apply that holding.

¶ 99. Like the unanimous court of appeals, I conclude that the "occurrence" here is the event of an assault. The insurance policy defines an "occurrence" as an "accident."

¶ 100. Applying the proper analysis, the question then becomes whether the assault of Schinner by the…