9th Circuit Holding for Client in "Advertising Idea" Misappropriation Claim
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a summary judgment in favor of the firm's insurer client that it need not pay a judgment of nearly $3 million against its insured under the "advertising injury" coverage of a general liability insurance policy despite the fact that the insured was alleged to have misappropriated an "advertising idea" of the plaintiff. In Twin City Fire Ins. Co. v. Ennen, the Ninth Circuit refused to extend the coverage when the underlying judgment against the insured was based upon a finding of breach of implied-in-fact contract. The case was handled by the firm's Casualty Coverage Practice Group in San Francisco.