Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

The Straight Story

(48,121 posts)
Thu Jan 12, 2012, 03:29 PM Jan 2012

Insurer Sues Marriott in Erin Andrews Case

Insurer Sues Marriott in Erin Andrews Case

LOS ANGELES (CN) - Travelers insurance disputes the scope of the coverage it owes Marriott in defending against ESPN sportscaster Erin Andrews, who claims the hotel chain negligently allowed a stalker to shoot nude video of her in a Nashville hotel room more than 3 years ago.

In March 2010, Michael Barrett was sentenced to 2½ years in prison for stalking with intent to harass after he admitted following Andrews to at least three hotel rooms in three states.

At the hotel room in the West End Marriott Hotel in Nashville, Barrett booked into an adjacent hotel room, altered a peephole in Andrews' hotel room door and filmed her disrobing with his cell phone. He posted the film on the Internet, where it went viral.

...

According to the complaint, Marriott cannot claim coverage for damages for personal injury because Andrews "did not learn of the wrongful acts until approximately five months after the end of the policy period, so she did not suffer any 'bodily injury' during the term of" the policy. It also claims that the hotel chain has no coverage for damages resulting from personal injury.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/01/12/42977.htm

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Insurer Sues Marriott in Erin Andrews Case (Original Post) The Straight Story Jan 2012 OP
The two defenses, and the dispute over reimbursement for atty fees, appear to be mutually exclusive. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2012 #1
This ought to be good Missy Vixen Jan 2012 #2
While this certainly is a case of the insurance company trying to "mitigate" their exposure. Sherman A1 Jan 2012 #3
+the number of women sexually assaulted in the United States each year Missy Vixen Jan 2012 #4
While I didn't read the interview Sherman A1 Jan 2012 #5
 

AnotherMcIntosh

(11,064 posts)
1. The two defenses, and the dispute over reimbursement for atty fees, appear to be mutually exclusive.
Thu Jan 12, 2012, 03:40 PM
Jan 2012

Obviously, if the insurance policy does not provide coverage for damages attributable to personal injuries, there would be no need to defend on the grounds that the event which occurred during the policy period was not discovered until after the lapse of the policy.

California is one state with case law which allows for the recovery of damages when an insurer refuses to defend and/or pay damages in bad faith.

Missy Vixen

(16,207 posts)
2. This ought to be good
Thu Jan 12, 2012, 05:01 PM
Jan 2012

I want someone to explain the following to me. As a female who must stay in a hotel room while on business trips, I have seen NO change in hotel security since the Andrews case, despite the hotels in question reporting that their housekeeping staff have found everything from Band-Aids to duct tape employed to cover peepholes in hotel room doors.

1. Why could Barrett walk up to the front desk of at least two hotels, ask for Erin Andrews by name, claim he was "a friend", and not a soul mentioned it to her or to ESPN's staff? She's a public personality. Even more, she probably stayed in the same hotels repeatedly. It's hard to believe he was undetected.

2. How was he able to install a peephole camera attached to a cell phone without detection by hotel staff? He would have to have access to her room for some period of time to do so, would he not? Who let him in?

Sherman A1

(38,958 posts)
3. While this certainly is a case of the insurance company trying to "mitigate" their exposure.
Thu Jan 12, 2012, 05:34 PM
Jan 2012

The question that comes to mind from my point of view is, "do any of the people who approved this course of action at Travelers, have daughters?" Just what would be their reaction if the person who (in their interpretation) was "not injured" was their daughter who had been recorded in the nude in a hotel room without her consent?

Missy Vixen

(16,207 posts)
4. +the number of women sexually assaulted in the United States each year
Fri Jan 13, 2012, 02:54 AM
Jan 2012

I wish I could rec a single post.

>Just what would be their reaction if the person who (in their interpretation) was "not injured" was their daughter who had been recorded in the nude in a hotel room without her consent?<

If you read the interview with Erin Andrews that ran in Marie Claire magazine, she mentions the fact it's been two years, and she is still dealing with the knuckledraggers who think it's cute and/or funny to bring up what happened to her. She initially thought her career was over. She will live with the fallout of a videotape she didn't consent to or authorize for the rest of her life.

http://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity-lifestyle/celebrities/erin-andrews-interview

Sherman A1

(38,958 posts)
5. While I didn't read the interview
Fri Jan 13, 2012, 05:07 AM
Jan 2012

I will do so now, Thank You for the link and appreciate your kind words.

As the Father of a Daughter... I hope Travelers & The Hotel chain have some "wonderful" days in court ahead, they deserve that & much, much more.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Insurer Sues Marriott in ...