Not at all surprising, and just as we predicted over a half-year ago. But good to see it favorably resolved. I doubt the insurers will seek a SCOTUS writ of cert., as there really are no live issues for such an appeal. This is straightforward state insurance contract language interpretation.
Here it all is -- from FiercePharma. . . and a bit from the appellate decision itself -- issued yesterday, in New Jersey:
. . .[Here,] we consider whether plaintiff Merck & Co., Inc. (plaintiff, or Merck) is entitled to insurance coverage under the "all risks" property insurance policies issued by defendants after a cyberattack infected and damaged thousands of plaintiff's computers in its global network. Defendants denied coverage under the "Hostile/Warlike Action" exclusion included in all their policies.
The trial court granted plaintiffs' summary judgment motions, finding the exclusion did not apply to plaintiffs' claims.
In considering the plain language of the exclusion, and the context and history of its application, we conclude the Insurers did not demonstrate the exclusion applied under the circumstances of this case, namely, that this cyberattack was a "hostile" or "warlike" action as contemplated under the exclusion. Therefore, we affirm. . . .
Now you know. Onward, grinning -- into the day of the "Force / Fourth" (now six years on), mañana!
नमस्ते
No comments:
Post a Comment