No Duty To Defend Boundary Dispute Trespass Claim Because No Allegation Of Actual Property Damage
Neighbor disputes over disputed boundary lines, access paths, shared driveways, etc. often raise questions about whether there is coverage under residential homeowner's policies. In his August 13, 2010 summary judgment ruling (.pdf) Federal District Court Judge Richard Jones addressed a common coverage issue in these disputes: whether allegations of trespass into the disputed portion of the properties may constitute "property damage" such that there is a duty to defend. Judge Jones acknowledged the liberal standard that applies to the duty to defend. But he concluded that there was no defense obligation in this instance because "a bare allegation of trespass, with no factual allegations suggesting physical damage or destruction to tangible property, does not trigger coverage under the 'property damage' provision."
