A Tale Of Two Cases Analyzing Coverage for Claims Asserted in Antitrust Lawsuits Under Indiana Law
In two published insurance coverage decisions, Judge Posner, writing for unanimous panels, applying Indiana law, relied upon extrinsic evidence not provided by any party and concluded that the applicable “personal and advertising injury” offense asserted could not be satisfied based on selective reference to facts that were not legally relevant to the issues posed.
Careful analysis of the coverage issues in light of the extrinsic evidence properly before the court, under applicable Indiana law, clarifies why potential coverage arose that the court’s Internet-based analysis avoided. While the internet may be a legitimate resource when used, much like a dictionary to elucidate the commonly understood meaning of language, it should not be a vehicle to introduce extrinsic evidence never addressed by either party to support an opinion, especially once that is published and precedential, at least within the federal courts. >read more