Jun 14, 2018
In the second part of a two-part series, Joe Oliva, a partner in Goldberg Segalla’s New York City office, continues to explore the relevant case law on insurance coverage for social engineering fraud claims under commercial crime policies. Joe explains the insurer-friendly, majority approach to whether a loss results “directly” from the “use of a computer.” Although Joe notes a minority of jurisdictions take a looser approach, courts still tend to place the onus on policyholders when considering whether a fraud immediately caused a loss. Joe concludes by scrutinizing the principles typically considered when evaluating coverage for losses stemming from social engineering fraud.