AUTO-OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY v. STEVENS & RICCI INC.; HYMED GROUP CORPORATION, HYMED GROUP CORPORATION, Appellant, 835 F.3d 388

Summary

HOLDINGS: [1]-An insurer's declaratory judgment action under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2201, seeking a determination that it had no obligation to defend or indemnify its insured in connection with an underlying judgment that arose as part of a class action settlement based on the insured's alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C.S. § 227, was properly resolved in its favor because the insurance policy did not cover the underlying judgment; [2]-The judgment against the insured was not within the terms of the business owners' policy because its intentional conduct in allegedly sending unsolicited fax advertisements was not an "accident" for purposes of "property damage" coverage under either Pennsylvania or Arizona law, and the damage to the class members was not covered "advertising injury" because there was no violation of the privacy interest in secrecy.