Coverage Arose Despite Misleading Pleading

In denying National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, PA’s Motion to Dismiss, the court in Market Lofts Community Association v. National Union Fire Insurance Company Of Pittsburgh, PA, No.: CV15-03093-RGK(MANx), 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100691 (C.D. Cal. July 30, 2015) granted Plaintiff, Market Lofts Community Association (“the Association”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, finding it was entitled to defense in the cross-complaint asserted against it by a developer.  

Read More

Extrinsic Evidence Ignored by District Court

The district court, refusing to consider extrinsic evidence in direct contravention of settled rules of California policy construction, determined that the declaratory relief claims for invalidity, non-infringement, and unenforceability, did not assert facts sufficient to evidence potential coverage within the policies, "disparagement" or "abuse of process" offenses.

Read More

Invasion of Privacy Claims Properly Articulated

The court determined that Big 5 satisfied the self-insured retention under both the Hartford and Zurich policies in a zip code liability action and met the requirements to show a potential for coverage under the policies under the pertinent coverage for "personal and advertising injury" for "oral or written publication, in any manner of material that violates a person's right of privacy." 

Read More

Reimbursement Not Available Under Kansas Law

Denying cross-motions for summary judgment because fact issues needed to be the subject of discovery in this diversity action, the court elected to delay addressing conflict of law issues respecting the insurer's quest for reimbursement of monies paid in settlement until discovery occurred in the action because it was unable to determine as a matter of law whether UUIC was entitled to pursue a remedy of reimbursement.

Read More

Policyholder's Choice of Forum Upheld

The court denied UUIC's motion to transfer venue to the Central District of California addressing each of the factors attendant on that motion, concluding that plaintiff's choice of forum weighed against transfer and conceded that the principal facts about coverage - the policy, the underlying complaint, Universal's promise to defend the suit, Universal's settlement of the suit - are undisputed. 

Read More

Direct Causal Link to Deceitful Advertising Required

Affirming the trial court, the court conceded, contrary to that tribunal that specifically, "Basic Research asserts that the phrase ‘use of another's advertising idea in your advertisement' should not be limited to claims of misappropriation or wrongful taking of another's advertising idea, but should rather include any form of ‘misuse,' including deceitful advertising. 

Read More

Entire Settlement Covered Despite Excluded Claims

After a three-day trial, Gauntlett & Associates obtained judgment against Continental Casualty Company, a CNA company, in the aggregate sum of $2,152,587.60 in principal and prejudgment interest- the entire amount sought - against an insurer that had refused to settle a copyright infringement/trade secrets infringement case against its insureds

Read More

Use of Trademark Phrase Not Slogan Infringement

Affirming in a magistrate district, the magistrate court's order, 773 F. Supp. 2d 799 on narrower grounds, the court parted company with the scope of coverage for infringement of a title more broadly defining it as agreeing that it could be Nature's Own if used as a title of the claimant's bread wrappers but finding that there was no evidence to clarify that that's the manner in which they were used because, "[t]he mere appearance of the trademarked phrase on the packaging does not allow us to assume that it is being used as the ‘heading' or ‘distinctive designation' of the wrapper. See Merriam-Webster's at 184, 823." Id. at 545. 

Read More