While it's not as glamorous as sex, drugs, and rock and roll, we've had some interesting questions related to the use and manufacture of drugs. These questions typically involve an impaired insured, which raises concerns regarding intent. Can an inebriated or stoned individual be held responsible for his actions? Regardless of whether the authorities hold him responsible, how does the homeowner's policy handle related claims? In this month's column, we look at both the impaired insured and the insured who manufactures drugs in the home.

Our first situation involves the 17-year-old who was under the influence of drugs and hallucinating. The teenager threw rocks at the neighbor's home, causing damage. The question presented to FC&S was whether or not the intentional acts exclusion would apply. The exclusion is for expected or intended injury or damage, so the issue is whether or not the individual on drugs could have expected or intended the damage. In this particular situation, the person was hallucinating. Therefore it's reasonable to say that the intentional acts exclusion doesn't apply. However, that doesn't mean that there is coverage.

Another, more relevant exclusion pertains to controlled substances. This exclusion is for injury or damage arising from the use, sale, manufacture, delivery, transfer, or possession of a controlled substance as defined by the Federal Food and Drug Law. Controlled substances include — but are not limited to — cocaine, LSD, marijuana, methamphetamine, and all narcotic drugs. If the insured is using drugs at the order of a physician and is following the prescription, then an exception applies. In the situation presented above, however, it's unlikely that the teenager was under doctor's orders to take a hallucinogen. This means that there is no coverage, whether the act was intentional or not, because the teenager was using a controlled substance.