West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc.

Customer filed proposed class action alleging that business violated her rights under the Biometric Information Privacy Act, alleging that customer are required to have their fingerprints scanned to verifying their identification, but that she was never provided with a written release allowing business to disclose her biometric data to any 3rd party. Customer alleged that business violated the Act by disclosing her fingerprint data to an out-of-state 3rd-party vender without her consent in violation of the Act. These allegations potentially fall within the policies' definition of "personal injury". Insurer filed declaratory judgment action, seeking declaration that it had no duty to defend or indemnify business. The violation of statutes exclusion in the policy bars coverage to violations of statutes that regulate methods of communication. As complaint alleges a violation of the Act, this exclusion does not apply. There is a bona fide dispute as to whether business would be entitled to coverage under the data compromise endoresement, and thus business is not entitled to damages under Section 155 of Insurance Code. (CONNORS and HARRIS, concurring.)