"he website claimed that along with Chubb Insurance Co., it had agreed to forgo $600,000 in defense costs in exchange for Nautilus’ agreement to defend it from July 2013 onward. In a motion for summary judgment filed in October 2014, Nautilus said that its policy only covered “accidents,” and said that Gawker’s intentional release of the tape and its accompanying story didn’t qualify. Gawker responded with a cross-motion for summary judgment in November, arguing that its policy covered damages from bodily injury, which “indisputably include emotional distress and mental anguish” under New York law. Friday’s settlement put an end to those competing motions."
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newss...
"he website claimed that along with Chubb Insurance Co., it had agreed to forgo $600,000 in defense costs in exchange for Nautilus’ agreement to defend it from July 2013 onward. In a motion for summary judgment filed in October 2014, Nautilus said that its policy only covered “accidents,” and said that Gawker’s intentional release of the tape and its accompanying story didn’t qualify. Gawker responded with a cross-motion for summary judgment in November, arguing that its policy covered damages from bodily injury, which “indisputably include emotional distress and mental anguish” under New York law. Friday’s settlement put an end to those competing motions."