There - you did it!!! You answered the question - at least for me! We had to drag it out of you, but thank you.
Just because you don’t like an answer, that doesn’t mean the answer itself is invalid.
The good news, from an attorney perspective, Kentucky, and most states courts, require adhesion contracts, which are contracts that one party, like the insurer, has unfettered control of the terms, and the other party, you and I, have very little say in the terms, to be strictly construed against the party that writes the contract. In other words, if the contract can be read in a way that benefits the underdog, it must be read that way. This is the way coverage attorneys are expected to review the facts of a loss and the terms deemed applicable in the insurance policy.
So, if there is a lawsuit, they must look at every claim individually to determine if there are any set of facts that would make that claim eligible for coverage. If there are, then coverage is provided, although, that issue may be addressed later in time by a court to determine if the specific facts, divulged through the discovery process, would provide coverage through a “declaration of rights” also known as a “declaratory judgment.”
I defended a gentleman in a civil suit who unfortunately shot someone accidentally. He was facing serious criminal charges as well. It was in his best interest to accept a plea in the criminal case which could have sent him to prison for up to 20 years. His homeowner’s insurance then sought to deny coverage based on an exclusion for damages “caused by or resulting from an act or omission which is criminal in nature and committed by the insured.” The trial court and court of appeals both agreed with the insurer and the Kentucky Supreme Court denied review.
The insurer then stopped representation of the client and I was no longer at the firm and was not in a position to continue to represent them.
You, Sir, are a wealth of information…thanks.
Interesting. I am glad you are happy with that answer but the “provided” in the answer basically says, “It depends.”
Also understand, that I am a private attorney, licensed to practice before all Courts and administrative bodies in Kentucky and admitted to practice in the United States District Courts for the Eastern and Western Districts of Kentucky, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and the Supreme Court of the United States.
I cannot and do not give legal opinions with respect to any states other than Kentucky however do comment, at times, with respect to the laws of other jurisdictions, without giving legal advice.
I do not work for and have no affiliation with USCCA except being a member and being in USCCA’s attorney network.
I do understand. I get that as an attorney you can’t be perceived as giving out legal advice. I am new to USCCA, and had no idea that you were not representing them here. I saw “USCCA Attorney Network Attorney” and thought that meant you were representing them. I apologize for that mistake. I had no idea!
We appreciate you @MikeBKY. You always help us out good sir.
I have to agree every situation and story is different. Train constantlty, Stay up on laws and who are passing them.
USCCA and CW Safe both seem to have good plans. What draws me to CW Safe is the unlimited defense expense. USCCA has a $250,000 payout limit. Is this amount realistically good with the current mainstream & social media? We’ve seen all too many self-defense scenarios on video which turn into high profile cases. Another issue with USCCA is if I’m convicted or plea bargain, they won’t pay my defense? I’ll need to re-read CW Safe to see if they have the same clause.
I recently joined a few months ago here at USCCA. ELITE membership. Paid in full.
This post is not legal advice. It is based entirely on my understanding of the contract I signed with USCCA.
It really seems straightforward to me. With a paid membership, you are insured to the limits described by your membership level.
If an incident occurs, they pay your legal fees up front as limited by the above.
Then, if you are not found to have committed a crime, they don’t come after you for money.
If you are found to have committed a crime, however, they can come after you for their money, as NO insurance of any type is allowed to cover criminal acts. Plea Bargen or full trial does not matter, it’s the judgement of the court that matters. USCCA does NOT determine if you committed a crime, only the courts do that.
In both cases though, they pay up front, so you will have a lawyer if/when you need one.
Always be mindful of your responsibility when going around armed. Life isn’t Hollywood, so be sure, be real sure before reaching for your gun. Once you touch it, the full weight of the law will come down on you. You had best be in the right, or things will go poorly after the fact.
So then if circumstances line up in a way that an insured defendant is most likely to be found guilty (poor judgement, acted on emotion, or whatever) then the same defendant would be better served to go with a public defender (assuming they are unable to pay expenses out of pocket) as there is no provision for repayment in this scenario?
Is a public defender even an option if insurance is available, regardless of the terms?
Just playing what if and have no intent to fall into this scenario…
The onus is on YOU.
YOU have the gun.
YOU choose to present the gun.
YOU chose to pull the trigger.
If YOU don’t think YOU will get acquitted, then YOU should not have acted. If YOU didn’t act, YOU wouldn’t be in trouble. If YOU would have died had YOU not acted, then YOU will likely not be convicted if YOU have a decent lawyer. Same thing in defense of another.
Notice a recurring word? That word defines the responsible party.
It’s not about the insurer, it’s all about the insured. For another example, if YOU choose to hit another car, do YOU expect YOUR insurance to pay YOU for YOUR crime? Of course not. (And before “what if it’s hit a car or a person blah blah blah” go troll elsewhere, this thread is about life and death and the aftermath of YOUR actions.)
If YOU are not scared to carry a gun, a device designed from the ground up to KILL PEOPLE, YOU should not be scared to defend YOURSELF in court, with a lawyer YOUR insurance is paying for. Why would YOU admit guilt with a Plea Bargen? Are YOU guilty? Or did YOU defend YOURSELF when YOU would have died/been seriously injured otherwise?
99% of words are not a reason to threaten another with death. Be responsible. Think things through. Hell, use YOUR damn pepper spray. The gun MUST be the absolute last ditch effort to stay alive.
In conclusion, we can “what if” until the cows come home, but it still all boils down to YOU.
I agree with you @Richard306 philosophically, however, practically, it is not always as simple as it sounds. We all know that innocent people have spent years on death row for murders they did not commit. Even with the best representation, a positive result can NEVER be guaranteed in our legal system.
Courts can require the defendant to pay a portion of the public defenders fee @Greg35 and not everyone is entitled to a public defender. To be eligible, the alleged crime must be a misdemeanor or felony and include the possibility of incarceration. You must also qualify as a poor person and lack the funds for a private attorney. Having insurance would not change whether you are a poor person but, if you are able to post a bond, there is a good chance you will not be considered a poor person.
I don’t own anything of value. So I don’t worry about these kinds of clauses or the possibility of civil actions against me.