The insured brought an action against the insurer, alleging breach of contract. The case centered on the question of whether curry is a pollutant. This case is Maxine Furs, Inc. v Auto-Owners Insurance Company, 426 Fed. Appx. 687 (11th Cir. 2011). Please note that this case is unpublished and therefore has limited precedential value.

Maxine Furs is a fur shop and it is located next door to an Indian restaurant. Because Maxine shared air-conditioning ducts with its neighbor, Maxine's furs soon began to smell like curry. Maxine had the affected furs cleaned and then made a claim with its insurer, Auto-Owners. The insurer denied coverage based on the absolute pollution exclusion clause in the policy. Maxine sued for breach of contract, the district rendered summary judgment to the insurer, and this appeal followed.

The Court of Appeals noted that the policy excludes coverage for any damage or loss caused by the discharge, dispersal, seepage, release, migration, or escape of pollutants. Pollutants are defined as any solid, liquid, gaseous, or thermal irritant or contaminant. So, the court said the question before it was: is curry aroma a pollutant?