indicating that the grandmother in that case allegedly "knew" of her husband's sexual abuse of the grandchildren; therefore, she "expected or intended" the resultant harm
How later courts described this case
- indicating that the grandmother in that case allegedly "knew" of her husband's sexual abuse of the grandchildren; therefore, she "expected or intended" the resultant harm
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WEDEMEYER, P.J.
(concurring). I join in Judge Schudson's analysis and conclusion that the intentional-acts exclusion precludes coverage in this case. Accordingly, I agree that this case should be affirmed. I write separately, however, because I do not join in Judge Schudson's public policy analysis provided in his separate concurring opinion. Because this case can be disposed of under the terms of the insurance policy at issue, it is unnecessary to address public policy. See Gross v. Hoffman, 227 Wis. 296, 300 , 277 N.W. 663, 665 (1938) (only dispositive issue need be addressed); and State v. Blalock, 150 Wis. 2d 688, 703 , 442 N.W.2d 514, 520 (Ct. App. 1989) (cases should be decided on the narrowest possible grounds).