DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Connecticut Appellate Court affirms denial of coverage under CGL policy for data breach

Posted on January 22, 2014 by Dissent

Michael A. Hamilton and Christopher J. DiIenno of Nelson Levine de Luca & Hamilton LLC discuss a case that pre-dates this blog but litigation over the insurer’s obligations has only recently resulted in an appellate ruling:

As more data breaches and information security events occur, the insurance industry will see more disputes over whether losses from these events are covered under commercial general liability (CGL) policies. In the latest round, the appellate court in Connecticut rejected the insureds’ attempts to seek coverage under a CGL policy for costs related to the response of a data breach of personal information.

In 2003, Recall Total Information Management, Inc. (Recall) agreed to transport and store computer tapes for IBM. Recall entered into a subcontract with Executive Logistics, Inc., (Ex Log) for transportation services. In 2007, a cart containing IBM’s computer tapes fell out of the back of an Ex Log van. Approximately 130 tapes, which included employment-related data, including Social Security numbers, birthdates, and contact information were taken from the roadside and never recovered. In order to provide legally required notice of the incident to the approximately 500,000 past and present IBM employees affected, IBM incurred more than $6 million in expenses for a call center and one year of credit monitoring. Recall sought indemnification from Ex Log after entering into a negotiated settlement with IBM. Ex Log (and Recall as an additional insured) sought coverage under a CGL policy issued by its carrier.

The court addressed the issue of whether the insurer had a duty to pay the notification costs under the “personal injury” section of the policy, in particular, coverage for injury caused by “publication of material that…violates a person’s right to privacy.” Plaintiffs alleged that the loss of the computer tapes was publication of the information to the thief.

Read more about the case and the court’s ruling on Lexology.

The case was Recall Total Information Management v. Federal Insurance Company. I’ve uploaded the opinion here (pdf).


Related:

  • Resource: NY DFS Issues New Cybersecurity Guidance to Address Risks Associated with the Use of Third-Party Service Providers
  • Hotel and Casino near Las Vegas Strip suffers data breach, documents say
  • Bombay High Court Orders Department of Telecommunications to Block Medusa Accounts After Generali Insurance Data Breach
  • Attorney General James Announces Settlement with Wojeski & Company Accounting Firm
  • John Bolton Indictment Provides Interesting Details About Hack of His AOL Account and Extortion Attempt
  • UK: 'Catastrophic' attack as Russians hack files on EIGHT MoD bases and post them on the dark web
Category: Business SectorLost or MissingOf NoteSubcontractor

Post navigation

← Court guts much of class action lawsuit against Sony over data breach, but some claims remain
Ca: Medicentres laptop with info on 620,000 patients was stolen in September. NOW they tell them? →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • District of Massachusetts Allows Higher-Ed Student Data Breach Claims to Survive
  • End of the game for cybercrime infrastructure: 1025 servers taken down
  • Doctor Alliance Data Breach: 353GB of Patient Files Allegedly Compromised, Ransom Demanded
  • St. Thomas Brushed Off Red Flags Before Dark-Web Data Dump Rocks Houston
  • A Wiltshire police breach posed possible safety concerns for violent crime victims as well as prison officers
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel
  • Almost two years later, Alpha Omega Winery notifies those affected by a data breach.
  • Court of Appeal reaffirms MFSA liability in data leak case, orders regulator to shoulder costs
  • A jailed hacking kingpin reveals all about the gang that left a trail of destruction
  • Army gynecologist took secret videos of patients during intimate exams, lawsuit says

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • As shoplifting surges, British retailers roll out ‘invasive’ facial recognition tools
  • Data broker Kochava agrees to change business practices to settle lawsuit
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel
  • Changes in the Rules for Disclosure for Substance Use Disorder Treatment Records: 42 CFR Part 2: What Changed, Why It Matters, and How It Aligns with HIPAAs
  • Always watching: How ICE’s plan to monitor social media 24/7 threatens privacy and civic participation

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net
Security Issue: security[at]databreaches.net
Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight
Signal: +1 516-776-7756
DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.