Posted on 12/25/2011 1:01:04 AM PST by Libloather
Insurer for Sandusky charity argues payouts
By MARK SCOLFORO | AP – Fri, Dec 23, 2011
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — An insurance company for a charity founded by Jerry Sandusky argued in a federal complaint Friday that it should not have to pay legal expenses or claims for the former Penn State assistant football coach now accused of molesting children.
Federal Insurance Co. said it would be wrong for the company to have to cover Sandusky because he is accused of conduct that did not involve his position as an executive or employee of The Second Mile, a charity for at-risk youth he founded in 1977.
In addition, "Pennsylvania courts have found that a person who sexually abuses a minor should not expect his insurer to cover his misconduct, particularly where the average insured purchasing insurance would cringe at the very suggestion that he was paying for coverage arising out of sexual abuse of a child," lawyers for the New Jersey-based company wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Insurance company lawyers can talk logical non sequiturs as well as any other people can — at least where defense of civil accusations are concerned.
That said, Sandusky is going to be wearing a barrel when this is all over.
If this proves to be accurate - if there are no accusations about his conduct in the context of his involvement with "The Second Mile" - then it seems to me that the insurance company for that business is taking a very reasonable position.
noose....
The charity seems legitimate, even though the man that created it is a pedophile POS.
If anything criminal has happened in the context of the charity, I expect it will come out now that Sandusky’s whole life is being investigated by people with a very substantial monetary interest in finding something. In that case, the charity’s insurer would be on the hook for whatever their policy covers ... but not until then.
What type of policy is it? If there are liability clauses which cover the Charity’s executives for wrongful behavior, then they could be responsible to pay for damages he caused.
However, that would be a civil complaint. He is being accused of criminal acts.
Insurance Company should have done due diligence on him whenever the policy was up for renewal. Executives come and go over time - they should know whose baggage they are insuring.
Typical insurance scum.
ping
Sounds like a back handed confession.
He’s looking for INSURANCE to pay for his misdeeds??????
How novel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.