Tags

, , , , , ,

Pursuant to an appeal from 664 S.E.2d 317 (2008), the NC Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals holding that the insurance company did not have a duty to defend its insured under a CGL policy when the policy excluded coverage for false statements made about the insured’s own products. In Harleysville Mut. Ins. Co. v. Buzz Off Insect Shield LLC, et al, the Court in reviewing the insurance policy found that the policy did provide coverage from some advertising injuries but not for injuries caused by false statements made by the insured about its own products. When the Court compared the allegations in the complaint to the insurance policy language, it was the CGL policies “Quality or Performance of Goods- Failure to Conform to Statements” exclusion that eliminated the insurance company’s duty to defend. This insurance company could still be on the hook for indemnity, which is a separate issue but for now they have dodged the bullet.

Advertisements