Calif. Odor Case Stinks For Businesses With CGL Policies

California court says commercial general liability policy does not apply as pure economic loss is not a “loss of use” of tangible property.

April 11, 2014

Law360, New York (April 11, 2014, 3:53 PM ET) ‐‐ The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California recently confirmed that purely economic loss is not a “loss of use” of tangible property and therefore does not constitute property damage under a commercial general liability policy. The district court determined that a restaurant’s reduced profits from loss of customers due to bad odors emanating from an adjacent restaurant is merely economic loss and is not covered property damage.

All Content © 2003‐2014, Portfolio Media, Inc.

The articles on our website include some of the publications and papers authored by our attorneys, both before and after they joined our firm. The content of these articles should not be taken as legal advice. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or official position of Robins Kaplan LLP.


Related Publications

March 14, 2024
How Many Cases Have You Tried to a Verdict?
Gabriel Berg, Lauren Coppola - New York Law Journal
January 2024
Crack the Code: Evaluating Cyber Claim Exposure
Taylore Karpa Schollard - The Robins Kaplan Insurance Insight
January 2024
Don’t Shoot The Messenger
Michele Detherage - The Robins Kaplan Insurance Insight
January 2024
The Weight of Words
Melissa M. D’Alelio - The Robins Kaplan Insurance Insight
Back to Top