Total Call No Bar to Implicit Disparagement Coverage

Infor Global Solutions (Michigan), Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 686 F. Supp. 2d 1005, 1007 (N.D. Cal. (San Jose Div.) 2010), Total Call Int'l, Inc. v. Peerless Ins. Co.,104 Cal. Rptr. 3d 319, (Cal. Ct. App. 2010) (did not represent a material change in governing law.) (The court's prior finding was thus unaffected when it concluded implicit disparagement based on allegations that E.piphany (Infor's predecessor) "falsely stated that it was the ‘only' producer of ‘all Java' and ‘fully J2EE' software solutions, which was an ‘important differentiator' between competing products, even though some competitors offered products with these exact features." In Total Call, the policyholder did not provide the service it promised in its advertisements, which by itself "carrie[d] no implication" that the one company's phone cards cost more or less than another's.).