
Readers of this blog know that one of the litigation risk management steps well-advised companies are taking in the current litigation environment is the adoption of forum selection bylaws, including, in particular, bylaws specifying a particular forum for the consideration of shareholders’ derivative suits. In a series of recent decisions, federal courts have reviewed these bylaws. In the following guest post, Melanie Saponara, Claims Manager – Executive Risk, Beazley, and Sarah Voutyras, Partner, Skarzynski Marick & Black LLP, take a look at recent federal appellate court developments on this issue and consider the implications. I would like to thank Melanie and Sarah for allowing me to publish their 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 the authors’ article. Continue Reading Guest Post: Can Exclusive Derivative Forum Selection Provisions Survive Ninth Circuit’s En Banc Review?
Because so many of you were out of the office or away from your desks last week, I am posting another reminder that, along with colleagues Marissa Streckfuss and Chris Bertola, I will be hosting a free, one-hour seminar on The Top Ten D&O Stories of 2022 on Thursday, January 12, 2023 at 11:00 am. Registration for the seminar can be found
As 2022 came to an end, many SPAC sponsors and executives, concerned about the possible onset on January 1, 2023, of an excise tax on amounts to be returned to investors, moved to liquidate their SPACs. As discussed further below, concerns about the possible applicability of the tax have now been alleviated, but given the general marketplace conditions for SPAC merger transactions, it seems likely that there will be further SPAC liquidations ahead in the new year. The possibility of a SPAC liquidation raises a number of considerations, including also important considerations with respect to D&O insurance. 




Businesses these days face a wide variety of headwinds – rising interest rates, economic inflation, supply chain and labor supply disruptions, war in Ukraine, even continued disruptions from COVID – that are interfering with business operations and affecting financial performance. In some instances, these macroeconomic factors are translating into securities litigation. In the latest example of this phenomenon, a plaintiff shareholder has sued video display systems company Daktronics following the company’s announcement that supply chain disruptions, labor shortages, and shutdowns in China caused a decline in the company’s sales, which led to a later announcement of a “substantial doubt” of the company’s ability to continue as a going concern. The December 21, 2022, complaint can be found
Since the initial coronavirus outbreak in the U.S. in March 2020, plaintiffs’ lawyers have filed a host of securities class action lawsuits against companies raising a variety of COVID-19-related allegations. Many of these cases have faced significant hurdles at the initial pleading stage, and in a number of cases the dismissal motions have been granted. The one categorical exception to these dismissal motion generalizations seems to be cases involving vaccine development companies. Two rulings in the past week seem to corroborate both of these observations. First, in a December 9, 2022 ruling in the securities suit pending against the diagnostic testing company Talis Biomedical, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss (albeit with leave to amend). However, in a December 12, 2022 ruling in the securities case against the vaccine development company Novavax, the court denied the defendants’ dismissal motion in significant part. The rulings in these two cases are discussed below.