Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Ulta Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc. v. Travelers Property Casualty Co. of America

ELR Citation: 41 ELR 20227
Nos. B224584, (Cal. App. 4th Dist. , 06/10/2011)

A California appellate court held that an insurance company has no duty to defend or indemnify a cosmetics company in an underlying action alleging that it violated Proposition 65, the California Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act. The Proposition 65 claim being asserted against the company is not covered by the policy. The policy provides coverage only for sums that the company becomes legally obligated to pay as damages because of "bodily injury" or "property damage." In the underlying lawsuit, the plaintiff asserted a single cause of action for violation of Proposition 65 for which she, on behalf of the general public, sought injunctive relief and penalties as provided in Health & Safety Code §25249.7. There was no allegation that the she or any other person had suffered bodily injury as a result of the company's products. Therefore, because the company did not become legally obligated to pay damages due to bodily injury, the policy was not triggered.