JEWELERS MUTUAL INSURANCE, Plaintiff, vs. MILNE JEWELRY COMPANY and IRVIN W. MILNE, Defendants.
Case No. 2:06-CV-243 TS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90551
December 14, 2006
Judge Ted Stewart
In an underlying action, Defendants are being sued under the Indian Arts and Crafts Enforcement Acts of 1990 and 2000 (I didn’t realize there were such Acts).
In the underlying action, it is alleged that Defendants advertised, displayed, and sold crafts and jewelry, through their website, falsely claiming the items to be of Native American origin. Defendants now move for summary judgment on the issue of Plaintiff’s duties to defend and indemnify. Plaintiff opposes Defendants’ motion and also moves for summary judgement, asserting that the claims in the underlying action do not fall within its policy’s coverage.
Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment was granted on the issue of Plaintiff’s duty to defend in the underlying action but denied as to claims which seek injunctive relief and punitive damages.
Plaintiff’s Cross Motion for Summary Judgment was granted in that Plaintiff has no duty to defend claims in the underlying action which seek injunctive relief or punitive damages. Plaintiff’s Cross Motion was denied as to all other grounds.