Olsen v. Siddiqi
2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 635
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- TCPA class action against Global in 2008 for unsolicited fax advertisements.
- Global carried a general commercial liability policy with American Family.
- Global tendered defense; American Family refused coverage for TCPA claims.
- Global settled underlying suit for $4,917,500 with judgment payable from insurance proceeds.
- Olsen garnished American Family in 2009; trial court proceedings led to Olsen’s judgment of $4,917,000 plus interest.
- Court held no coverage under policy for statutory TCPA damages, and no personal and advertising injury coverage due to policy endorsement; case remanded for entry of summary judgment in favor of American Family.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether TCPA statutory damages are property damage under the policy | Olsen argues statutory damages are property damage under policy | American Family argues statutory damages are penalties, not damages under policy | Statutory damages are penalties, not property damage under policy |
| Whether the policy exclusion for personal and advertising injury bars coverage | Olsen asserts ambiguity in endorsement should favor coverage | Exclusion plain and unambiguous; supersedes contrary provisions | No coverage for personal and advertising injury under policy endorsement |
| Whether coverage existed for the underlying TCPA damages warranting remand | N/A (Olsen seeks coverage under policy) | There is no coverage for damages; court should grant summary judgment for AF | No coverage; remand for summary judgment in favor of American Family |
Key Cases Cited
- Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Lou Fusz Automotive Network, Inc., 401 F.3d 876 (8th Cir. 2005) (TCPA statutory damages not covered where policy lacks punitive-damages language)
- Farmland Industries, Inc. v. Republic Ins. Co., 941 S.W.2d 505 (Mo. banc 1997) (Damages generally do not include fines/penalties absent special language)
- State ex rel. McNamee v. Stobie, 92 S.W. 191 (Mo. banc 1906) (Penalties vs. remedial statutes; penalties may be penal in nature)
- Collier v. Roth, 468 S.W.2d 57 (Mo. App. 1971) (Distinguishes remedial vs. penal statutes)
- Thornburgh Insulation, Inc. v. J.W. Terrill, Inc., 236 S.W.3d 651 (Mo. App. E.D. 2007) (Ambiguity in policy language requires favorable construction for coverage)
- Burns v. Smith, 308 S.W.3d 505 (Mo. banc 2010) (Ambiguities in insurance contracts resolved in insured’s favor)