BI’s Article search uses Boolean search capabilities. If you are not familiar with these principles, here are some quick tips.

To search specifically for more than one word, put the search term in quotation marks. For example, “workers compensation”. This will limit your search to that combination of words.

To search for a combination of terms, use quotations and the & symbol. For example, “hurricane” & “loss”.

Login Register Subscribe

Insurers not liable to cover Urban Outfitters in ZIP code lawsuits


Insurers are not obligated to provide defense coverage to Urban Outfitters Inc. for litigation in connection with its allegedly inappropriate collection of ZIP code information, based on their policies’ language, an appeals court ruled.

Philadelphia-based Urban Outfitters Inc. and its Anthropologie Inc. subsidiary have been sued in three putative class action lawsuits related to the collection of ZIP code data, according to Tuesday’s ruling by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia in OneBeacon America Insurance Co. v. Urban Outfitters Inc.; Anthropologie Inc. v. Hanover Insurance Group.

A three-judge panel of the 3rd Circuit unanimously upheld dismissal of the case in May 2014 by the U.S. District Court in Philadelphia based on the language of the policies issued by OneBeacon America, a unit of Hamilton, Bermuda-based OneBeacon Insurance Group Ltd., and by Worcester, Massachusetts-based Hanover Insurance Group Inc.

For instance, in the first underlying case, filed in 2013 in the District of Columbia, plaintiffs alleged that Urban Outfitters’ request for ZIP code information when customers made a credit card purchase violated the District of Columbia statute.

The appeals court agreed with the lower court that the insurers’ policy provided coverage for “personal and advertising injury” arising out of publication. Urban Outfitters’ actions, “do not constitute ‘publication’ within the policies’ definition of ‘personal and advertising injury,’” said the ruling.

The appeals court also upheld dismissal of the two other actions, based on the insurers’ policy language, one of which was filed in state court in San Diego, with the other now in U.S. District Court in Boston.

Read Next