Maddox v. Colonial Life & Accident Insurance

I concur only in the result reached by the majority because I cannot agree with its interpretation of the term “self-inflicted.” In interpreting that term to require an intent to inflict but not to kill, the majority has, in effect, created coverage for shooting deaths in which the shooting was intentional but the result, death, was not. Such an interpretation is clearly inconsistent with the express purpose and scope of the insurance policy — to compensate only those losses caused by an accidental means. Because the policy expressly covers only losses due to “accidental means” and the…