

As I have frequently noted on this blog (for example, here), problems involving relatedness between claims present recurring coverage issues under D&O insurance policies. In the following guest post, Maurice Pesso and Greg M. Steinberg of the White and Williams LLP law firm take a look at a recent decision out of the Northern District of Illinois applying New York law to a D&O insurance dispute involving related claims issues. I would like to thank Maurice and Greg for their willingness to allow me to publish their article on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this site’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Maurice and Greg’s guest post. Continue Reading Guest Post: Another Court Applies New York’s “Sufficient Factual Nexus” Test to Related Claims
Along with all of the other risks arising from companies’ increasing dependence on electronics communications and data storage technology has come not only the risks of a data breach caused by a hacker, but also the risk of a company’s transfer of funds by one of its employees who has been duped into believing the transfer was legitimate and authorized. These kinds of losses, which have been called “payment instruction fraud” or “social engineering fraud,” raise of a host of potential issues under traditional insurance policies, owing to the voluntary nature of the funds transfer made by a person authorized to access the company’s computer system. A recent decision by the Ninth Circuit illustrates the kinds of coverage problems that can arise from these circumstances. The Ninth Circuit’s unpublished April 17, 2018 opinion in Aqua Star (USA) Corp. v. Travelers Casualty & Surety Company of America can be found 
One of the trendy concepts in certain circles in recent years has been the idea of litigation management bylaws – that is, the adoption by company of bylaw provisions that help manage the company’s litigation risks. For example, one bylaw provision that has been widely adopted by publicly traded companies is a forum selection provision specifying a particular jurisdiction as the preferred forum for litigating shareholder disputes.

In a development in an enforcement action that is the first of its kind, the SEC has levied a $35 million penalty against Altaba, Inc. as successor in interest to Yahoo, for Yahoo’s two-year delay in reporting the massive data breach the company experienced in December 2014. Altaba, which neither admitted nor denied any wrongdoing, agreed to pay the penalty as part of the settled resolution of SEC cease-and-desist proceedings. The penalty follows the SEC’s recent release of cybersecurity disclosure guidance for reporting companies and clearly indicates that the agency is increasingly focused on companies’ cybersecurity disclosure practices. The SEC’s April 24, 2018 press release about the penalty can be found 

