Supreme Court of California

The Court of Appeal properly held that plaintiff-insurer had no duty to defend defendant-insured in an underlying suit for patent and trademark infringement, false designation of origin, and damage to business, reputation, and goodwill, where: 1) the commercial general liability policy at issue covered personal and advertising injury, including claims arising from oral, written, or electronic publication of material that slanders or libels a person or organization or disparages a person's or organization's goods, products or services; 2) a claim of disparagement requires a plaintiff to show a false or misleading statement that (a) specifically refers to the plaintiff's product or business, and (b) clearly derogates that product or business; 3) each requirement must be satisfied by express mention or by clear implication; and 4) because the underlying suit contains no allegation that defendant-insured clearly derogated the underlying plaintiff's product, there is no claim of disparagement triggering plaintiff-insurer's duty to defend.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/12/2014
• Published 06/12/2014

Judges

• LIU

Court

• Supreme Court of California

Counsel