Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s Prevail On Summary Judgment In Contested Advertising Injury Litigation

The Honorable John F. Walter of the United States Federal District Court, Central District of California, granted summary judgment to Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London when he found there was no triable issue of fact as to whether Brighton Collectibles, LLC’s  alleged conduct of selling customer lists constituted advertising injury, in accord with the California Supreme Court in Hameid v. National Fire Ins. of Hartford, 31 Cal.4^th 16, 28-29 (2003).   Hameid rejected the argument that “advertising” included activity involving personal solicitation of customers, such as sending mailers to customers on a mailing list or making personal phone calls to the customer from a customer list. Instead, the California Supreme Court concluded that the term “advertising” as used in a CGL policy means “widespread promotional activities usually directed to the public at large” and the allegations against Brighton regarding sale of customer lists did not meet this criteria.