Opinion
2023 CW 0796
02-26-2024
RONALD BISSETT III v. SAFEPOINT INSURANCE COMPANY
Safepoint Insurance Company, applying for writs, 21st Judicial District Court, Livingston, No. 173933.
BEFORE: GUIDRY, C.J., WELCH, HOLDRIDGE, WOLFE AND GREENE, JJ.
WRIT GRANTED.
The district court's July 14, 2023 judgment denying the motion for summary judgment filed by Safepoint Insurance Company is hereby reversed. An insurer seeking to avoid coverage through summary judgment bears the burden of proving some exclusion applies to preclude coverage. Brilliant National Services, Inc. v. Travelers Indemnity Co., 2021-1472 La.App.1st Cir. 9/7/22), 349 So.3d 606, 611. Safepoint Insurance Company successfully carried its initial burden by demonstrating coverage is not available to Plaintiff based on the applicability of the intentional acts exclusion in the insurance policy at issue. The burden then shifted to Plaintiff, who failed to produce factual support sufficient to establish the existence of a genuine issue of material fact or that the mover is not entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See La. Code Civ. P. art. 966(D) (1). As such, Safepoint Insurance Company's motion for summary judgment is granted, and all claims asserted by Plaintiff, Ronald Bissett III, against Defendant, Safepoint Insurance Company, are dismissed with prejudice.
JMG
JEW
GH
Wolfe and Greene, JJ., dissent.
Genuine issues of material fact remain, which preclude summary judgment. See La. Code Civ. P. art. 966(A) (3).