NU Online News Service, Nov. 8, 3:38 p.m. EST
In an important ruling this summer, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals decided that an online marketing firm was entitled to defense cost coverage under two different types of liability policies for the same spyware download incident.
Lawyers Richard J. Bortnick and Stephanie Gantman of Cozen O'Connor detailed the facts of the underlying case and the subsequent ruling by the July 23, 2010 ruling by the appeals court in Eyeblaster Inc. v. Federal Ins. Co. in a special article published in this week's edition of National Underwriter's print magazine.
The court found concurrent coverage for an online marketing company, known as Eyeblaster, under both its commercial general liability insurance policy and a separate Information and Network Technology errors and omissions liability policy in circumstances where the company had installed software on a consumer's computer system, allegedly corrupting the consumer's operating system, the two attorneys reported.
Recommended For You
Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader
Your access to unlimited PropertyCasualty360 content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:
- Breaking insurance news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
- Weekly Insurance Speak podcast featuring exclusive interviews with industry leaders
- Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
- Critical converage of the employee benefits and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, BenefitsPRO and ThinkAdvisor
Already have an account? Sign In Now
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
