More On

Court takes broad view of E&O policy’s antitrust exclusion

Companies need to pay close attention to policy language

Companies taking out errors and omissions (E&O) policies should pay close attention to the exclusion language after the 1st Circuit took a broad view of an antitrust exclusion in The Saint Consulting Group Inc. v. Endurance American Specialty Insurance Company Inc. 

In 2007, the national food retailer SuperValu Inc. reportedly enlisted The Saint Consulting Group to block the construction of two Wal-Mart stores in the Chicago suburbs of Mundelein and New Lenox. To this end, a Saint representative, Leigh Mayo, allegedly concealed his affiliation with Saint and hired an attorney to file multiple lawsuits against the Mundelein development, indefinitely stalling its construction.

Expansive Interpretation

When ruling on the exclusion’s scope, the 1st Circuit relied on the 1999 case Bagley v. Monticello Insurance Co., in which the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that “the phrase ‘arising out of’ must be read expansively, incorporating a greater range of causation than that encompassed by proximate cause under tort law.”

Alanna Byrne

Bio and more articles

Join the Conversation

Advertisement. Closing in 15 seconds.