Bad news for P.F. Chang -Court rules that all claims for 2014 data breach are not covered under its cyberinsurance!

02 June 2016 Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog Blog
Authors: Peter Vogel

Businessinsurance.com reported that a federal court ruled that P.F. Chang’s cyber policy covered “direct loss, legal liability, and consequential loss resulting from cyber security breaches” but “Chang’s and other merchants are unable to process credit card transactions themselves and must enter into agreements with third parties.”  My friend Judy Greenwald’s June 2, 2016 article entitled “Chubb scores victory in key cyber ruling” reported that:

On June 10, 2014, Chang’s learned that computer hackers had obtained and posted on the internet about 60,000 credit card numbers belonging to its customers, and the company notified Federal Insurance of the breach that same day.

US District Judge Stephen M. McNamee granted summary judgment to Federal Insurance Co (a unit of Chubb) on June 1, 2016 in the case of P.F. Chang’s China Bistro Inc. v. Federal Insurance Co. that after Bank of America requested reimbursement from P.F. Chang of $1.9 that:

(Bank of America) did not sustain a privacy Injury itself, and therefore cannot maintain a valid claim for injury against Chang’s.

Judy included this observation from policyholder attorney Robert D. Chesler (Anderson Kill P.C., Newark, New Jersey) that he:

…believes this is the first ruling on a cyber insurance policy, and is important because it could signal a wave of litigation between cyber insurers and policyholders

There may be an appeal so it may not be over yet!

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Authors

Related Services