Elcom Technologies, Inc. v. Hartford Ins. Co. of Midwest

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “knowledge of falsity” exclusion did not negate duty to defend because false advertising claim could be proved by establishing reckless indifference
• rejecting “knowledge of falsity exclusion argument where the underlying case involved false advertising claims”
• claim for false advertising can be proven by showing reckless indifference so exclusion does not apply

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).