Neil J. Cohen

One of the hot topics in securities regulation and enforcement has been the question of what position the SEC will take with respect to cryptocurrencies. In the following guest post written in the form of a one-scene play, Neil J. Cohen, a lawyer and publisher of the Securities Reform Act Litigation Reporter, imagines a fictional conversation involving an SEC official discussing cryptocurrencies. I would like to thank Neil for submitting his play to be a guest post on this site – this is the first play that has appeared on this site! I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Neil’s play. Continue Reading Guest Post: Fictional SEC Official Discusses Crypto Off-the-Record  

I know that with the holidays just around the corner, most people are focused on clearing off their desks and getting out of town, rather than on what they are going to be doing the second week of January. Just the same, I want to encourage everyone to get out their calendars and note the date and time of the “Top Ten D&O Stories in 2019” webinar I will be conducting in January.  This free, hour-long webinar will take place at 11:00 am EST on Tuesday, January 14, 2020. My colleague and friend Marissa Streckfus will be moderating the event.

 

In the webinar, I will be discussing the key developments during the past year that affect the liability exposures of corporate directors and officers. The specific topics I will discuss will include:

  • Current heightened levels of securities class action litigation
  • Key factors driving the securities litigation and other corporate litigation
  • Current state of merger objection litigation
  • Impact of the Cyan decision on IPO litigation
  • Emerging D&O liability issues, such as cybersecurity and privacy
  • The impact current developments have for D&O policyholders and insurers

To register for this event, please click here. I hope everyone will plan on attending this January 14 webinar.

Samantha Wu

In prior posts, I have noted the series of U.S. securities class action lawsuits that have been filed recently against publicly traded companies in the cannabis business, including several Canadian companies. In the following guest post, Samantha Wu of the Bersenas Jacobsen Chouest Thomson Blackburn law firm in Toronto provides an overview of the unique exposures that directors and officers of Canadian cannabis companies face. A version of this article previously was published on the law firm’s website (here). I would like to thank Sam for allowing me to publish her article as a guest post on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Sam’s article. Continue Reading Guest Post: Canadian Cannabis Companies’ Directors and Officers Face Unique Exposures

Liam Fitzpatrick

It is no secret that the current political environment is complicated – in the U.S., in the U.K., and around the world. The fraught political climate has important implications for companies and their directors and officers. In the following guest post, Liam Fitzpatrick takes a look at the repercussions for U.K. companies arising out of the present political circumstances there. Liam is Client Services Director at Mactavish. A version of this article  was published prior to the recent U.K. elections on the MacTavish website (here). I would like to thank Liam for allowing me to publish his article as a guest post on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Liam’s article. Continue Reading Guest Post: Keeping Your Company Safe in the Age of Populism

Gil Isidro

As many readers will recall, earlier this month I published a guest post in which John McCarrick and Paul Schiavone provided a list of policy terms and conditions they suggested should be revisited as D&O insurers seek to reposition themselves toward profitability. I included my own comments to John and Paul’s article as an appendix to their guest post. Last week, I published a second guest post in which Paul Ferrillo provided his thoughts in response to John and Paul’s article. In the following guest post, Gil Isidro  adds his comments to the dialog. Gil Isidro is Lead Coverage Counsel with Woodruff Sawyer.  Before joining Woodruff last summer, Gil was an attorney with AIG Financial Lines for 14 years, the last few of which were spent overseeing legal support of its management liability division. I would like to thank Gil for allowing me to publish his article as a guest post on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Gil’s article. Continue Reading Guest Post: You Say You Want a Revolution? Well, You Know… No

Under claims made insurance policies, policyholders must provide timely notice of claim to their insurers in order to trigger coverage. Late notice is among the most common reasons that insurers deny coverage for claims. In order to try to avoid a coverage denial for late notice, policyholders have tried to argue that late notice should not preclude coverage where the policyholder renewed the coverage and where successive policies with the same insurer are in place. In a recent decision, an Ohio appellate court, applying Ohio law, rejected a policyholder’s attempt to rely on this kind of continuity of coverage argument. The court’s decision raises some interesting issues, as discussed below. Continue Reading Ohio Court Rejects Continuity of Coverage as Counter to Late Notice

Paul Ferrillo

In a recent guest post, industry veterans John McCarrick and Paul Schiavone outlined some policy terms and conditions they suggested D&O insurers may want to address as the insurers try to re-orient toward profitability. In the following guest post, Paul Ferrillo provides his response to John and Paul’s article. Paul is a shareholder in the Greenberg Traurig law firm’s Cybersecurity, Privacy, and Crisis Management Practice. I would like to thank Paul for allowing me to publish his guest post as an article on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Paul’s article.

 

Continue Reading Guest Post: Scope of Coverage is Fine – Rate and Claim-Paying are the Keys

Earlier this week, I published a post noting the challenges policyholders can face in establishing coverage under traditional crime and cyber liability insurance policies for losses arising from “payment instruction fraud” (sometimes called “social engineering fraud). I also discussed the recent availability of sublimited coverage extensions for these kinds of losses. In response to my earlier post, several readers sent me messages noting that several courts have, in fact, found coverage under commercial crime policies for payment instruction fraud losses. As if to prove their point, the same day as I published my post, the 11th Circuit issued an opinion affirming a district court ruling that a firm’s payment instruction fraud losses are covered under the “fraudulent instruction” provisions of the applicable commercial crime policy.  The 11th Circuit’s December 9, 2019 opinion can be found here. Continue Reading 11th Circuit: Crime Policy Covers Payment Instruction Fraud Loss

In a lengthy and detailed post-trial opinion, New York (New York County) Supreme Court Justice Barry Ostrager has ruled that the New York Attorney General failed to establish that ExxonMobil Corporation made material misrepresentations in its public disclosures concerning how the company accounted for climate change risk.  As discussed below, there are a number of interesting features to Justice Ostrager’s ruling. A copy of Justice Ostrager’s December 10, 2019 opinion can be found here. Continue Reading Court Rules Against NYAG in ExxonMobil Climate Change Disclosure Trial

As I have noted in prior posts, a recurring challenge many organizations face these days is the threat of “payment instruction fraud,” also sometimes called “social engineering fraud” or “payment impersonation fraud.” In these schemes scammers use official-seeming email communications to induce company employees to transfer company funds to the imposters’ account. Among the many issues arising when these kinds of scams occur is the question of insurance coverage for the loss. Some victims may expect that their cyber liability insurance will cover their loss.

 

However, as Lauri Floresca of Woodruff-Sawyer points out in her December 5, 2019 post on her firm’s blog entitled “Payment Impersonation Fraud: Why is This Common Cyber Problem Not a Valid Cyber Claim” (here), these  claims rarely involve the kind of cyber security breach required to trigger cyber insurance coverage. Accordingly, there are other steps well-advised companies may want to take to try to protect themselves from these kinds of losses. Continue Reading Payment Instruction Fraud and Cyber Insurance Coverage