Illinois Appellate Court
Civil Court
Insurance
Court properly ruled that homeowners policy insurer was required to defend its insured in malicious prosecution suit, where policy definition of "personal injury" included injury arising from "malicious prosecution". Suit against insured seeks damages for common law tort of malicious prosecution, and thus alleges injury arising from malicious prosecution. Although policy generally excluded coverage of intentional conduct, it explicitly provided coverage for damages caused by malicious prosecution, and the insured could reasonably anticipate that policy protections would apply. (McDADE and O'BRIEN, concurring.)