Fourth Circuit Affirms Coverage For Cyber Incident
Time 2 Minute Read
Categories: Cyber, Duty to Defend

On April 11, 2016, the Fourth Circuit affirmed a trial court’s decision that Travelers must defend a class action against its policyholder, Portal Healthcare Solutions, arising out of Portal’s alleged failure to safeguard confidential medical records. In the class action, the plaintiffs contended that Portal had allowed their private medical records to be accessed on the internet for more than four months by a simple Google search of a patient’s name. Portal sought coverage under provisions in two Travelers policies that provided coverage for alleged injury arising from “electronic publication of material” that “gives unreasonable publicity to a person’s private life” or that “discloses information about a person’s private life.”

The trial court found that these provisions required Travelers to defend the class action against Portal. The court concluded that allowing confidential medical records to be found in an online search constituted “electronic publication of material” that gave “unreasonably publicity to” and “disclose[d] information about” the patients’ private lives. In reaching that conclusion, the court rejected Travelers’s argument that there was no publication or disclosure because no third party was alleged to have viewed the records.

In the opinion today, the Fourth Circuit “commend[ed] the district court for its sound legal analysis.” Comparing the allegations in the class action complaint to the Travelers policies, the Fourth Circuit determined that the complaint at least potentially or arguably alleged a publication of private medical information that was covered under the policies. Accordingly, the policies obligated Travelers to defend Portal in the underlying class action.

  • Counsel

    Patrick counsels clients on all aspects of insurance and reinsurance coverage. He assists clients in obtaining appropriate coverage and represents clients in resolving disputes over coverage, including in litigation and ...

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 1 Minute Read

If recent years have taught insurance practitioners anything, it is that the most consequential coverage disputes rarely turn on novelty alone. In 2025, courts continued to resolve high‑stakes insurance disputes by returning to first principles—examining when claims are related, how losses and occurrences are defined and aggregated, and how policy language allocates risk across time and conduct. D&O coverage and other core insurance law issues again occupied center stage, while decisions in property, cyber, and liability disputes reinforced a familiar theme: policy interpretation remains the decisive factor in determining whether coverage is available in an increasingly complex claims environment. As the decisions discussed below demonstrate, 2025 confirmed that even as risks evolve, coverage disputes remain grounded in careful, policy‑specific analysis.

Time 4 Minute Read

In a recent opinion, the 8th Circuit rejected an insurer’s attempt to expand insurer victories in a COVID-19 context to other more traditional claims of property damage. Reaffirming long standing principles, the court held soot and water damage associated with a fire constituted “direct physical loss or damage” under a commercial property insurance policy.

Time 2 Minute Read

Google recently resolved two cases—one by verdict and one by settlement—involving allegations regarding the control that Google promised to give users over Google’s use of their data. 

Time 3 Minute Read

On September 2, 2025, two class actions were filed in federal district court alleging that defendants digital advertising platforms Xandr, Inc. and Index Exchange, Inc. violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act by unlawfully intercepting wire communications for the purpose of violating the Department of Justice’s Bulk Data Transfer Rule.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page