Woo, et ux. V. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. et al., No. 77684-9

Majority by Fairhurst, J.

Dissent by J. Johnson, J.

Dissent by C. Johnson, J.



                                     No. 77684-9



       C. JOHNSON, J. (dissenting) - The duty to defend arises when a 



complaint against the insured, construed liberally, alleges facts which could, 



if proved, impose liability upon the insured within the policy's coverage.  



Truck Ins. Exch. v. VanPort Homes, Inc., 147 Wn.2d 751, 760, 58 P.3d 276 



(2002).  In her complaint, Tina Alberts alleged that Robert Woo devised a 



scheme to humiliate her, ordered the boar tusks, placed them in her mouth



when she was unconscious, took pictures, had them developed, and told 



Alberts that she had a trophy to take home.  



       By these facts, Alberts unambiguously alleges that her injuries were the 



                                            1 



consequence solely of Woo's intentional conduct, none of which involves 



providing dental services.  Even under the most liberal construction, the 



complaint's allegations are not conceivably covered. I agree with and would 



simply adopt the well reasoned opinion by the Court of Appeals.



AUTHOR:

       Justice Charles W. Johnson



WE CONCUR:



       Justice Barbara A. Madsen 



                                            2