Defender Security Co. v. First Mercury Insurance Co.

Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing plaintiff-insured’s action alleging that defendant-insurance company breached its commercial general liability policy by failing to defend or indemnify plaintiff in underlying lawsuit that alleged that plaintiff recorded clients’ phone calls that contained confidential information without their permission and without notifying them of said recording. Defendant had no duty to defend or indemnify plaintiff on underlying lawsuit, where: (1) language in policy provided plaintiff with coverage only if there was oral or written “publication” of material that violated person’s right of privacy; and (2) allegations of lawsuit did not accuse plaintiff of communicating contents of subject recordings to anyone or that plaintiff accessed or listened to recordings after they were made so as to qualify as “publication” for purposes of coverage under policy. Ct. rejected plaintiff’s argument that publication was achieved where clients’ confidential matters were transmitted to plaintiff’s recording devices.