My last post was about Rass v. The Travelers Cos. Inc., __ N.E.3d __, 2016 WL 6636281 (Mass. App. Ct.), in which the Massachusetts Appeals Court held that an insurer is not liable for pre-notice defense costs.
One of the coverage issue before the Massachusetts Appeals Court was whether the trade disparagement claim was covered under the policy issued by Travelers to Rass. The policy provided coverage for statements that "disparage a person's or organization's goods, products or services."
Travelers argued that the email did not disparage any goods, products or services, but rather disparaged Tulshian herself, or her ownership of the sauces. The court disagreed, holding that an objective and reasonable policyholder would expect the disparagement claim to be covered under the facts alleged.