An insurer says it owes nothing for a shooting tied to an apartment complex - and it is pointing to one broad exclusion to prove it.
Kinsale Insurance Company has asked a Florida federal court to declare it owes no defense or coverage to a policyholder after a shooting left a mother and her young son injured. The complaint, filed July 30, 2026, sets up a coverage fight that apartment-risk underwriters will want to follow.
According to the filing, the woman was driving past an apartment complex controlled by Our Home Apartments Corp. on May 27, 2024, when two males "ultimately produc[ed] a firearm and [began] shooting indiscriminately." The complaint states that "one or more of the gunshots" hit her vehicle, "indirectly striking her and directly striking her minor son." The underlying complaint alleges the child was struck in the neck.
The mother sued Our Home in Miami-Dade circuit court on April 17, 2026, alleging it failed to keep its property safe from foreseeable threats, according to Kinsale's filing. Our Home turned to Kinsale, which says it is funding the defense - but only under a full reservation of rights, meaning it is paying for now while reserving the right to argue it never owed coverage.
That argument leans on the policy's assault and battery exclusion. Kinsale's complaint quotes wording that cuts coverage for any injury "arising out of, related to, or, in any way involving any actual or alleged assault, battery, harmful or offensive contact, or threat, whether provoked or unprovoked." As quoted in the filing, the exclusion also reaches a failure to provide a safe environment, a failure to warn, and the negligent hiring or supervision of staff. Kinsale's position is that a shooting is a battery, and that everything the underlying suit pins on Our Home sits inside the exclusion.
The insurer raises a second, standalone argument. Kinsale says a designated-location endorsement limits key coverage to one address - 1360 Sharazad Boulevard in Opa-Locka - while the shooting happened as the woman drove past a different property, 1355 Ali Baba Avenue. Neither the event nor the injuries occurred at the covered location, the insurer alleges, so coverage fails there too.
There is also money in play. Citing a policy clause that "where there is no coverage under this Policy, there is no duty to defend," Kinsale says it reserved the right to recover what it has spent defending Our Home, and it is asking the court for those costs back.
For claims professionals, the filing is a study in how much weight an absolute assault and battery exclusion can carry - and how a designated-location endorsement can do similar work from another angle. Both turn on policy wording.
The allegations in Kinsale's complaint have not been tested in court, and no judge has ruled on the coverage question.
