Kentucky’s highest court has ruled in favor of Westport Insurance in a dispute over coverage related to a wrongful conviction case. The court decided that Westport’s law enforcement liability policies, which are based on occurrences during the policy period, only trigger coverage when charges are filed—not during the time of incarceration that follows.
This ruling came in a case involving William Virgil, who was wrongly convicted of murder in 1988 and spent 28 years in prison before DNA evidence cleared him in 2015. After his release, Virgil sued the City of Newport and its police officers for violating his civil rights, claiming harm caused during and after his imprisonment.
Westport insured Newport from 1997 to 2000 but denied coverage for Virgil’s lawsuit, arguing that no injury occurred during its policy period because the charges were filed long before. Although Westport initially defended Newport under reservation of rights, it later sought a court declaration that it had no duty to cover the claims.
The Kentucky Supreme Court agreed with Westport. It explained that under the policies, coverage depends on when the “personal injury” happens. Since malicious prosecution was identified as the injury, the court said it occurs when criminal charges are filed—not throughout the imprisonment. The court pointed out that Virgil’s suffering while incarcerated was a result of the original injury, not a new one within the 1997-2000 coverage window.
The ruling also dismissed claims that the policy language was unclear or ambiguous. Instead, the justices found the terms straightforward and consistent with recognized legal interpretations. This means that for wrongful conviction cases like Virgil’s, occurrence-based liability insurance will not cover injuries linked to extended imprisonment if the charges were filed before the policy was in effect.
This decision offers clarity on how Kentucky courts will handle coverage disputes involving law enforcement liability insurance in situations of long-running claims related to malicious prosecution. It highlights the importance of timing in determining when an “occurrence” happens under insurance policies.