The maker of Just For Men says its insurers refused to pay after it settled injury claims out of pocket.
Combe Incorporated, the White Plains, New York company behind Just For Men hair color, has sued a group of Lloyd's of London syndicates and Everest Indemnity Insurance Company, accusing them of failing to honor their coverage obligations. The complaint, filed July 30, 2026 in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, asks the court to make the insurers pay.
Here is the setup, according to the filing. Until November 1, 2018, Combe carried occurrence-based general liability coverage - the kind that responds based on when an injury happened, no matter when the claim is filed. Then, the complaint says, Combe's insurers declined to renew, and the company was forced onto a claims-made program, which only responds to claims made during the policy period.
At the heart of the dispute are what the filing calls the "Underlying Claims" - personal injury claims made on or after November 1, 2018 alleging bodily injuries from Just For Men products. Combe says it settled those claims and paid out of pocket after the insurers denied coverage.
The tower is the story. Underneath sits the Beazley primary policy, with a $5 million limit and a $2,500,000 aggregate deductible. Above it is the Newline first-layer excess policy at $15 million. Above that, according to the complaint, a $20 million second layer is split evenly - $10 million from Life Science and $10 million from Everest. The excess policies follow Beazley's terms unless their own wording says otherwise.
Combe leans on the products liability grant, which says the underwriters "will pay on behalf of the Insured Damages and Claims Expenses, in excess of the Deductible, which the Insured shall become legally obligated to pay in respect of any Claim first made against any Insured during the Policy Period caused by an Occurrence arising out of the Products/Completed Operations Liability Hazard involving a Nutraceutical that takes place after the Retroactive Date and before the Expiration Date."
Combe says it settled with Beazley in December 2024, exhausting the primary, and that the underlying settlements exceeded both the Beazley and Newline limits. On that basis, the filing says, the excess layers should respond.
Instead, the complaint says, the insurers denied coverage by citing two provisions: a "Class Action, Multi-Plaintiff and MDL Exclusion" and a "Retroactive Limitation Clause." Combe says neither applies.
Then there is batching. The policies let related claims be treated as one, with consent that cannot be "unreasonably withheld." Combe says it made a written batching request on January 6, 2020 and that the insurers unreasonably refused - though it adds that the Newline limit is exceeded even without batching.
Combe brings seven causes of action, seeking declaratory judgments, breach-of-contract damages, interest, costs and fees, and it has demanded a jury trial. For excess writers and claims teams, the case runs straight through the questions that decide whether a tower pays: trigger, exhaustion, exclusions and a reasonable batching call.
The allegations have not been tested in court, and no court has ruled.
