Court Rules for Insured in a Ransomware Insurance claim!

04 February 2020 Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog Blog
Authors: Peter Vogel

My friend Judy Greenwald reported on that “A U.S. District Court ruling in Maryland that an insurer must indemnify a screen-printing business under its business owner’s policy for costs incurred in a ransomware attack may be the first of its kind concerning ransomware, and is likely to be cited frequently by other courts, some experts say.”  The February 4, 2020 article entitled “Ransomware case's impact could be far-reaching” regarding case of National Ink & Stitch LLC v. State Auto Property and Casualty Insurance Co. (Baltimore) included these comments from the Court’s Order granting summary judgment:

The plain language of the Policy contemplates that data and software are covered and can experience ‘direct physical loss or damage.’

In addition to Plaintiff’s data and software constituting covered property under the Policy’s terms, Plaintiff has also demonstrated damage to the computer system itself, despite its residual ability to function,...

State Auto seems to equate ‘physical loss or damage’ to Plaintiff’s computer system to require an utter inability to function. 

The Policy language, and the relevant case law, impose no such prerequisite,…

Judy quote me about the probability of winning a motion for summary judge:

…is very low, and so the fact that this judge ruled this way tells me the evidence in front of her was absolutely persuasive.

My expectation is that insurance for ransomware may be written differently following this ruling!

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.