Word Games: Raising and Resolving the Shortcomings in Accident-Insurance Doctrine That Autoerotic-Asphyxiation Cases Reveal

Authors

Sam Erman, University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

This Note argues that autoerotic asphyxiation deaths are accidents and not the results of intentionally self-inflicted injuries. Part I formally analyzes accident-insurance case law to show that current, viable approaches to accident insurance indicate that autoerotic asphyxiation deaths are accidental. Part II claims autoerotic asphyxiation deaths should not trigger intentionally self-inflicted injury exclusion clauses because the practice does not intentionally injure. This Note concludes beneficiaries should recover when accident-insurance policyholders die during autoerotic asphyxiation.

Recommended Citation

Sam Erman, Word Games: Raising and Resolving the Shortcomings in Accident-Insurance Doctrine That Autoerotic-Asphyxiation Cases Reveal, 103 Mich. L. Rev. 2172 (2005).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol103/iss8/5