American Family Mutual Insurance is asking a federal court to declare it has no duty to cover a Missouri business owner in a trade secrets and non-compete dispute.
In a complaint filed September 22 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, the insurer seeks a declaratory judgment against Alan J. Bruns, Andrew T. Bruns, and R.H. Bruns Vault & Monument Co., all Missouri residents or entities.
The case centers on whether American Family must defend or indemnify Alan J. Bruns under his homeowners and umbrella insurance policies in an ongoing state court lawsuit.
At the heart of the dispute is a $200,000 sale of R.H. Bruns Vault & Monument Co. and its real estate. According to the complaint, Andrew T. Bruns and the company allege that Alan J. Bruns breached the business and real property sale agreement, including its non-compete provision, and violated Missouri’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act after the August 3, 2023, transaction.
The underlying lawsuit, filed in the Circuit Court of Franklin County, Missouri, claims that Alan J. Bruns used trade secrets for his own economic value, diverted significant contract business, and competed with the business by offering the same services, including buying and selling headstones, performing burial services, installing burial foundations, and opening and closing new gravesites.
The plaintiffs in the underlying case seek damages including lost profits, disgorgement of sums earned by Bruns while competing, and attorneys’ fees and costs. These are allegations only, as set out in the complaint.
American Family’s complaint asserts that neither the homeowners policy nor the umbrella policy provides coverage for the claims in the underlying lawsuit. The insurer cites several policy exclusions, including those for business activities, intentional acts, contract liability, and statutory damages.
The homeowners’ policy, according to the complaint, excludes coverage for “any occurrence arising out of, resulting from, or in connection with any… business conducted from any location or engaged in by any insured.”
It also excludes “any type of bodily injury or property damage that an insured… intends; or may expect to result from any intentional act or omission.”
Another exclusion applies to “any Personal Liability under any… contract or agreement; or statement, document, or contract that relates to any transfer of ownership of any real property that any insured owns.”
The umbrella policy, as described in the complaint, contains similar language. It excludes “business pursuits or business property of an insured other than farming/ranching” and does not cover “injury arising out of an expected or intended act or omission.” It also excludes punitive, statutorily imposed, or court-ordered damages, including attorney fees related to such damages.
American Family asserts that the underlying lawsuit does not seek covered damages for personal liability under the homeowners policy because none of the counts allege an “Occurrence” causing “Bodily Injury” or “Property Damage.”
The insurer also contends the lawsuit does not seek covered damages under the umbrella policy for “Personal Injury,” as none of the counts allege any injury arising out of the named offenses in the Missouri Endorsement.
American Family states it issued a reservation of rights letter to Bruns on August 6, 2025, and is currently defending Bruns in the underlying lawsuit under the personal injury coverage provisions of the umbrella policy, subject to reservation of rights.
The company seeks a judicial declaration that it owes neither a duty to defend nor indemnify Bruns for any claims or damages in the underlying lawsuit.
