"Suicide by cop" is not "suicide" under Florida law and terms of life insurance policies

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida has ruled that “suicide by cop” (i.e, whereby an individual intentionally provokes a lethal response after violently threatening law enforcement officers) is not “suicide” under Florida law and the terms of two life insurance policies. Thus, the beneficiaries of the policies are entitled to the death benefits even if the insured allegedly wanted law enforcement to kill him during a stand-off. The policies both provided that death benefits would not be paid if the insured committed “suicide” within two years of when the policies were issued. Before the end of this two year period, the insured was shot and killed by law enforcement during a confrontation.

Reviewing and analyzing Florida law, the Court concluded that the plain meaning of the term “suicide” encompasses the act of killing oneself—not the killing of a person by another. The Court specifically found as follows:

For these reasons, the Court finds no ambiguity in the term “suicide” as used in Policies ‘244 and ‘472. Under the plain language of those Policies, coverage is excluded if the insured voluntarily and intentionally takes his own life. The exclusionary clauses do not encompass instances, as here, where the insured died as a result of being shot by another person. Although the parties dispute Justin’s [i.e., the insured’s] ultimate motivations for violently confronting law enforcement officers, and although the Court accepts Plaintiff’s allegation that Justin provoked law enforcement into fatally shooting him, there is no dispute that Justin died as a result of being shot by police officers on October 8, 2020, and hence it cannot reasonably be said that he committed suicide. “If the language is ambiguous, the contract should be construed in favor of the insured; but if it is unambiguous, it must be given effect as written.” Harrington, 54 So. 3d at 1001–02. Because the Court finds that the Policies are clear and unambiguous, the Court finds no reason not to apply the Policies according to their terms and in favor of Defendants [i.e., the beneficiaries].

See North American Company for Life and Health Insurance v. Caldwell, et. al., Case No. 21-14197-CIV-CANNON/Maynard, January 18, 2022 (ECF No. 37, Order Granting Defendants’ Motion for Judgment on Pleadings.) Please contact Joel Ewusiak for legal assistance with disputes concerning entitlement to death benefits under life insurance policies.