The homeowner policy issued by Cambridge Mutual covered Rachel Boker, but it excluded any loss, directly or indirectly resulting from an insured person's intentional acts. The policy also stated that the company would provide a defense for the insured "even if the suit is groundless, false or fraudulent."

In February 1991, Rachel fatally stabbed her boyfriend, Keith Tollett, during an argument in which he produced a steak knife. Rachel went to the kitchen and returned with a larger knife with which she slashed him three times. The first two were minor cuts but the third wound was fatal.

Keith's mother filed suit against Rachel, who referred the matter to Cambridge. The trial court ruled that Cambridge was not liable under its policy and had no duty to defend the insured or to indemnify her.

On appeal by Keith's mother, the higher court determined that Cambridge was responsible to defend its insured in the action but concluded that, since Rachel's actions were intentional and resulted in Keith's death, Cambridge had no duty to indemnify the insured.

The judgment entered in the trial court in favor of Cambridge was reversed as to its duty to defend the insured and affirmed as to the conclusion that the policy did not cover any loss resulting from intentional injuries. Cambridge was not required to indemnify its insured.

Cambridge Mutual Fire. Ins. Co. v. Tollett et al., Appellants--No. 95CA006176--Court of Appeals of Ohio, Ninth District, Lorain County--June 26, 1996--677 North Eastern Reporter 2d 1232.