Main Menu
Print PDF

Phishing Scam Does Not Implicate Forgery Coverage, Court Requests Further Briefing for Computer Fraud Coverage

Pratt's Privacy and Cybersecurity Law Report | May 2020
By: Joshua A. Mooney

A federal district court in New Jersey has ruled that loss from mis-wiring bank funds as a result of a phishing scam did not implicate forgery coverage under a Financial Institution bond, but left open the possibility that computer fraud coverage under a crime policy might be implicated.

Joshua Mooney discusses this decision and what it means in his article, "Phishing Scam Does Not Implicate Forgery Coverage, Court Requests Further Briefing for Computer Fraud Coverage," which was featured in the May 2020 issue of Pratt's Privacy & Cybersecurity Law Report.  

This correspondence should not be construed as legal advice or legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general informational purposes only, and you are urged to consult a lawyer concerning your own situation and legal questions.
Back to Page