Public company D&O insurance policies restrict “entity coverage” (that is, coverage for claims directly against the corporate entity, as opposed to those against individual directors and officers) to “Securities Claims.” If a claim against the company is not Securities Claim then there is no coverage for the company’s defense fees, settlements, and judgments. This obviously creates a huge incentive for the companies to try to show that the claims against them are Securities Claims – which, in turn, has spawned a great deal of coverage litigation addressing the question whether or not a particular corporate lawsuit is or not a Securities Claim.

In the latest example of these kinds of coverage disputes, last week the District of Maryland, applying Maryland law, held that an antitrust claim filed against a corporate entity was not a securities claim within the meaning of the applicable policy – not because the antitrust claim was not “Securities Claims,” but rather because the dispute did not involve alleged transactions in the securities of the company or its subsidiaries. The Maryland court’s March 24, 2026, opinion can be found here.

Continue Reading D&O Insurance: Not a “Securities Claim” if No Securities of the “Company” Involved

The recently filed securities class action against Beyond Meat (Beyond Meat SCA) illustrates how accounting judgments, industry-wide demand shifts, and corporate turnaround narratives can create D&O exposure. Filed in January 2026, the complaint alleges that Beyond Meat and senior executives misled investors during 2025 by failing to timely disclose a material asset impairment while publicly emphasizing operational discipline and a path toward EBITDA-positive performance. As discussed below, the allegations arise amid a broader deterioration in the plant-based meat sector, documented in a March 10, 2025, CNBC report, and alongside emerging academic research questioning the assumed health advantages of plant-based meat alternatives.

Taken together with the allegations of the Beyond Meat SCA, the marketplace shift and emerging academic findings may provide a useful lens for assessing certain D&O underwriting risk.

Continue Reading D&O Lessons from the Beyond Meat SCA

In the months since the current Trump administration first announced the so-called “Liberation Day” tariffs, some companies have struggled to deal with the tariffs’ economic impacts, and in at least some cases, companies’ tariff-related problems have led to securities class action litigation (as discussed, most recently, for example, here). In the latest example of this phenomenon, earlier this week the social media company Pinterest was hit with a securities suit after the company announced that tariff-related headwinds had caused its business partners to cut back on advertising on the company’s site. A copy of the March 30, 2026, Pinterest complaint can be found here.

Continue Reading Tariff-Related Securities Suit Hits Social Media Platform Pinterest

As the D&O Diary reported earlier this year, the Trump Administration has increasingly turned to the False Claims Act to support policy priorities, including anti-DEI and tariff-related initiatives. The President’s March 16, 2026, Executive Order (EO) may signal that FCA enforcement activity will only continue to accelerate. In particular, the President’s EO establishes a multi-agency “Task Force to Eliminate Fraud,” directing the federal government to “use all available resources” to combat fraud, enhance coordination, and strengthen enforcement across federally funded programs.  

Continue Reading A New Federal Anti-Fraud Task Force and D&O Exposure

Financial news sites were ablaze recently with the news that a co-founder and board member of the data server company Super Micro Computer had been indicted, along with two other company executives, for allegedly conspiring to smuggle high-end Nvidia chips into China, in violation of U.S. export control laws. With news that sensational, and in light of the ensuing stock price drop, it was only a matter of time before plaintiffs’ lawyers would file a securities class action lawsuit. And, sure enough, late last week, a plaintiff shareholder did file a securities suit against the company.

The complaint in the new lawsuit, which can be found here, is interesting in and of itself, relating as it does to the sensational circumstances involved. But the lawsuit is arguably even more interesting for what it represents – that is, as an illustration of the ways that geopolitical issues can – and increasingly are – translating into securities class action lawsuits.

Continue Reading Geopolitics, Export Controls, and D&O Risk

The rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based tools and applications has also meant the rise in AI-related infrastructure, such as data centers and power generation support. And just as we have seen the rise of securities litigation relating to companies’ adoption of AI tools and processes, we have also seen securities suits relating to AI infrastructure development.

In the latest example of this kind of AI infrastructure-related litigation, on March 20, 2026, a plaintiff shareholder filed a securities class action lawsuit against the engine and power systems company Power Solutions International, alleging that the company’s new strategy of providing power generation solutions for AI data centers had fallen short of the company’s representations. A copy of the new complaint against Power Solutions can be found here.

Continue Reading Power Supply Company Hit with AI-Related Securities Suit

In the wake of the February 20, 2026, U.S. Supreme Court decision to invalidate tariffs imposed under the current Administration’s use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA), litigation has been filed by companies seeking tariff refunds and by shareholders alleging securities violations against a company whose operations and financial results were impaired by “tariff headwinds.”   A new category of litigation is also beginning to appear: consumer class actions alleging that companies improperly passed tariff costs on to customers.

Continue Reading Tariff Pass-Through Litigation Expands

As detailed in prior posts on this site (here and here), turbulence in the private credit markets has roiled the financial marketplace. Collapses (and related scandals) involving high profile private credit borrowers – including Tricolor and First Brands– have led to bankruptcies, civil lawsuits, and criminal indictments. The disruption in the private credit markets has also recently led to securities class action lawsuits involving private credit lenders. In the most recent example of this phenomenon, late last week a plaintiff shareholder filed a securities class action lawsuit against private credit lender Hercules Capital, after a short seller published a report suggesting that the company had misrepresented its borrower due diligence processes. A copy of the March 20, 2026, lawsuit can be found here.

Continue Reading Private Credit Firm Hit with Securities Suit After Short Seller Report

Most readers have undoubtedly seen a recent and significant increase in attention paid to prediction markets, like Kalshi and Polymarket. The rise of prediction markets has also led to regulatory and other concerns.  But amid all the scrutiny, questions remain about what prediction market companies may represent as D&O risks. A newly filed securities complaint against a now-defunct crypto platform company may create new disclosure, governance, and insider-trading-related D&O exposures.

Continue Reading Prediction Markets and Emerging D&O Risk

Following a rare trial in a federal securities class action lawsuit, a civil jury late last week found that statements Elon Musk made on social media in 2022 about his proposed $44 billion acquisition of Twitter misled investors. However, the jury also found that the plaintiff had not made the case that certain other statements by Musk were misleading. The jury’s verdict has a number of interesting implications, as discussed below. A copy of the jury’s March 20, 2026 verdict form can be found here.

Continue Reading Jury in Rare Securities Suit Trial Finds Musk Misled Twitter Investors