The logic and validity of the public policy argument that to require insurance companies to pay punitive damages would place a burden upon the innocent insurance carrier, and ultimately the public itself, is weak and indefensible. The concern for not wanting to punish the insurance carrier, an innocent party, is not logical since any insurance company is an innocent party. The involvement is based on the contractual relationship of indemnification. If an insurance company does not wish to indemnify for punitive damages, then it should specifically exclude such coverage in the policy. In the absence of such a specific exclusion, public policy properly analyzed requires it to pay.
Martin G. Lentz, Payment of Punitive Damages by Insurance Companies, 15 Clev.-Marshall L. Rev. 313 (1966)