Photo of Kevin LaCroix

Kevin LaCroix

Subscribe to Kevin LaCroix's Posts

Kevin M. LaCroix is an attorney and Executive Vice President, RT ProExec, a division of RT Specialty. RT ProExec is an insurance intermediary focused exclusively on management liability issues.

Follow:Read more about Kevin LaCroixKevin's Linkedin ProfileKevin's Twitter Profile

As readers of this blog know, in recent months there have been a number of AI-related corporate and securities suits filed against companies and their executives (as discussed, for example, here). In general, these suits have mostly involved “AI-washing” allegations – that is, allegations that the defendant company misrepresented its AI-related prospects or capabilities. More recently, however, the cases increasingly have involved allegations not that the defendant company overstated its AI-related opportunities, but rather understated its AI-related risks.

Last week, in the latest example of this type of suit, a plaintiff shareholder filed a derivative suit against executives of the digital ad tracking firm DoubleVerify, alleging that the defendants had caused the company to omit to disclose that AI-related developments were undercutting the company’s revenues. A copy of the derivative suit complaint can be found here.Continue Reading Digital Ad Analytic Firm Hit With AI-Related Disclosure Suit

Sarah Abrams

Among one of many changes afoot at the SEC under its current Chair Paul Atkins is Atkins’s proposal calling for the agency to reconsider its rule allowing shareholders to include non-binding shareholder resolutions in corporate proxy materials. In the following guest post, Sarah Abrams, Head of Claims Baleen Specialty, a division of Bowhead Specialty, takes a look at Atkins’s proposal concerning shareholder resolutions and considers the potential impact of a rule change on D&O liability. I would like to thank Sarah for allowing me to publish her article on this site.Continue Reading Guest Post: Is the SEC Signaling the End of ESG Shareholder Proposals?

The imposition of tariffs is a key component of the current Trump administration’s trade policies. A corollary of the tariff policies is that the administration is also giving high priority to enforcement of the tariffs. In the latest illustration of the administration’s tariff enforcement approach, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey has brought criminal tariff evasion charges against an Indonesian jewelry firm, the company’s founder, and two company employees, based on allegations that the company engaged in a multi-year scheme to evade payment tariffs due on over $1 billion of jewelry and gold the company imported to the U.S. A copy of the November 17, 2025, criminal complaint can be found here. The U.S. Attorney’s Office’s November 17, 2025 press release about the complaint can be found here.Continue Reading U.S. Brings Criminal Tariff Evasion Enforcement Action

If a defendant company settles a shareholder lawsuit by issuing stock rather than by paying cash, does the settlement represent “Loss” within the meaning of the company’s D&O insurance policy? Earlier this year, a Delaware court said it does. Now, the Delaware Supreme Court has affirmed the lower court, for the reasons stated by the lower court. As discussed below, these rulings raise some interesting issues. The Delaware Supreme Court’s December 9, 2025, order affirming the lower court can be found here.Continue Reading Does Issuance of Stock to Settle a Shareholder Suit Constitute “Loss”?

As detailed in a recent guest post on this site, authorities in a variety of jurisdictions around the country and around the world are grappling with the right approach to regulate AI. Several U.S. state legislatures, including those in California, Colorado, Utah and Texas, among others, have already enacted AI-specific laws. Now, on December 11, 2025, the White House issued a new Executive Order entitled “Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence” (here). The new EO seeks to override or preempt state laws on AI in favor of unified federal regulation. As discussed below, the order raises a number of concerns and may face both resistance and court challenge.Continue Reading White House Issues Executive Order Targeting State AI Regulation

Nessim Mezrahi
Stephen Sigrist

In the following guest post, Nessim Mezrahi and Stephen Sigrist analyze financial market trends to assess the recent variances in the U.S. securities litigation risk. Nessim Mezrahi is co-founder and CEO, and Stephen Sigrist is a senior vice president, at SAR LLC. SAR previously published this data on their U.S. Securities Litigation Risk Management Report – Nov. 2025, here. I would like to thank Nessim and Stephen for allowing me to publish their article on my site.Continue Reading Guest Post:  Deterioration in U.S. Securities Litigation Risk

Sarah Abrams

In the following guest post, Sarah Abrams, Head of Claims Baleen Specialty, a division of Bowhead Specialty, takes a look at the potential liability and litigation risks surrounding celebrity-branded companies in light of the recent litigated dispute that has arisen between golfing legend Jack Nicklaus and the company he founded. I would like to thank Sarah for allowing me to publish her article as a guest post on this site.Continue Reading Guest Post: Slice and Dice: Celebrity-Branded Companies and Litigation Risk

Sexual harassment allegations can of course support an employment practices claim. But if the conduct results in harm to the company through an adverse judgment, can the same misconduct allegations also support a claim under Delaware law for breach of fiduciary duty? At least one past Delaware court said, in the context of that case, that the answer is “yes.” However, a recent Delaware Chancery Court decision took a different view, holding that “interpersonal” conduct alleged was “not a matter of corporate internal affairs.” A copy of the December 1, 2025, decision can be found here.Continue Reading Del. Court: Harassment Charges Do Not Establish Fiduciary Duty Breach         

Sarah Abrams

One of the more interesting emerging phenomena involving cryptocurrencies has been the recent rise of crypto treasury companies – that is, companies whose primary purpose is acquiring and holding cryptocurrencies as part of their corporate treasury. There arguably are a host of concerns with these kinds of firms. Among other things, and as discussed in the guest post below from Sarah Abrams, there may be issues for these kinds of firms in connection with FDIC deposit insurance disclosure requirements. Sarah is Head of Claims Baleen Specialty, a division of Bowhead Specialty. I would like to thank Sarah for allowing me to publish her article as a guest post on this site.Continue Reading Guest Post: FDIC Advertising Rule and Crypto Treasuries

Just about every company these days is grappling with the arrival of Artificial Intelligence (AI). But what should companies be telling their investors about the impact of AI deployment on their operations and financial results? At a recent meeting, the SEC’s Investment Advisory Committee recommended that the agency issue guidance requiring issuers to provide disclosures about the impact on the company from AI. As discussed below, while the committee’s recommendations may be unlikely to cause the agency to issue AI disclosure rules or guidance, the committee’s recommendations do provide a useful framwork to consider corporate AI-related disclosure best practices.Continue Reading SEC Investor Advisory Committee Recommends AI-Related Disclosure Guidelines