On April 9, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s ruling that Starr Surplus Lines Insurance Co. need not provide coverage for Alorica Inc.’s loss from a 2018 phishing attack because the letter received from Alorica regarding the incident did not constitute a “claim” under Starr’s policy.
The policy defined a “claim” as a “written demand for monetary or non-monetary relief.” Alorica contended that a letter from Express Scripts to Alorica, which rejected Alorica’s demand for $4.8 million, constituted a “demand for monetary relief,” arguing that Express Scripts’ refusal to pay was a “request that Alorica forgive a debt” and therefore satisfied the policy’s definition of a “claim.”
Rejecting Alorica’s argument, the Ninth Circuit noted that a “refusal to accept a demand is not itself a demand; it is only a refusal.” The appellate court recognized that Express Scripts’ letter did not ask Alorica to do anything at all, but rather declared Express Scripts’ unconditional willingness to “cooperate reasonably in any investigation” into the underlying computer fraud — and to pay Alorica $56,791 — with no consideration from Alorica expected or requested.
Because Alorica failed to cite any case holding that a refusal of another’s demand, without more, constituted a demand, the panel agreed with the district court’s ruling that Express Scripts’ letter was not a “claim” under the policy.
©2026 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.
Insights focused on legal developments in the property-casualty industry.
Recent Posts
Editorial Contacts
Shareholder
Shareholder
Shareholder
Shareholder
