Insurance: Employee Theft Clause-Covered Loss-Shipping Costs

Where insurer sought a declaration that it did not owe payment to insured company due to the employee theft clause of the relevant policy, the district court did not err in determining that the company suffered a covered loss resulting directly from an employee’s theft when the employee embezzled money by misrepresenting the price at which the company’s product was sold, and the court did not err in determining that the amount of covered loss included the product’s shipping costs.

Judgment is affirmed.

National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh v. Cargill, Inc. (MLW No. 79556/Case No. 21-3141 – 11 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Kelly, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, Wright, J. (Timothy R. Macdonald, Denver, CO, argued for appellant) (Aaron Daniel Van Oort, Minneapolis, MN, argued for appellee).