Wolfe’s Borough Coffee Inc. – dba - The Black Bear Micro Roastery

16 Burleigh Road, POB 31, Center Tuftonboro, NH 03816

Phone: 603-569-6007   FAX: 603-569-6009

On the WEB at www.BlackBearCoffee.com    E-mail: bbmr@worldpath.net

Wednesday, June 26, 2002

Debra Bertone

Litigation Specialist

Zurich American Insurance Company

POB ZZ

Jamaica, NY 11430-00ZZ

Re:      Claim #: 564-0066470-001 CF

Policy #: PAS 30929054

Date of Loss: 7/3/01

Re:      Zurich June 20, 2002 Certified Letter regarding

Starbucks motion for leave to serve an Amended Complaint No. Ol-CV-5981

Dear Debra,

I would like to respond to the above referenced letter.

The word “damages” refers to monetary loss in this instance.  Our policy clearly states that Zurich is “ … obligated to pay sums that the insured becomes legally obligated to pay as damages …”.  Nowhere in the applicable section of our policy is the interpretation of the word “damages” parsed into separate categories.  Starbucks is specifically asking the court to award substantial sums of money, which would clearly represent an overwhelming monetary loss to us.  The policy is written in English, and we are clearly insured against such monetary loss.

You have once again made reference, in print, to “insurance industry intent”, and “relevant case law”.  However, it is now more than three months since these discussions began, and you still have failed to produce even a single shred of documentation to back up you position.  While you state that you are not acting in concert with Starbucks in “restraint of trade”, I have to reiterate that the appearance of “restraint of trade” seems a possibility, considering the foregoing.

A reasonable individual might well deem your actions as intimidation, intended to force us to “walk away”, and suffer considerable losses in the process, or face the very real prospect of our business failing before we even have our “day in court”.

Insurance premiums are considered an essential business expense to protect against unforeseen, and catastrophic loss.  Since you have no evidence that we have done anything wrong, and since Starbucks is seeking substantial monetary damages, you are contractually committed to protecting us from the aggressive actions of Starbucks.  I strongly request that you cease restricting our defense council from pursuing an adequate defense.

If you can clearly document you position, why don’t you do so?  Continuing to act in the manner that you are, without any visible justification to do so, would seem to indicate deliberate intent on your part to save money for Zurich, and assist Starbucks in achieving its goal, while putting the existence of our business in extreme peril.

Sincerely,

Jim Clark