A standard feature of virtually every commercial contract is a choice-of-law clause. The general perception is that these types of clauses help facilitate settlement and reduce litigation costs. There is, however, one type of contract the usually omits choice-of law-clauses – insurance policies. Throughout the insurance industry and across most lines of coverage, insurance policies lack choice of law clauses. The reasons why insurance policies omit provisions that are standard for virtually every other type of commercial contract is the subject of an interesting new paper from University of North Carolina Law Professor John F. Coyle, entitled “The Mystery of the Missing Choice-of-Law Clause.” Coyle’s paper raises a number of interesting questions, some of which may be relevant as some insurers consider the question of whether they many need to add choice of law clauses to their policies. A copy of Professor Coyle’s December 2, 2021 paper can be found here. Continue Reading Why Don’t Insurance Policies Have Choice-of-Law Clauses?

In just a few days, when the time comes to tot up the 2021 securities class action lawsuit filings and to mark out the key 2021 filing trends, one of the key stories is going to be the surge during the year in the number of SPAC-related securities suit filings. In the latest example of this 2021 filing trend, late last week a plaintiff shareholder filed a securities class action lawsuit against a post-SPAC-merger fintech company. The individuals named as defendants in the lawsuit include two former officers of the SPAC. The new lawsuit has many of the features that have characterized the SPAC-related lawsuits that have been filed this year. Continue Reading Post-SPAC-Merger Fintech Company Hit with Securities Suit

I hope all of you already know this, for just in case and for those of you who do not, registration is now open for the 2022 PLUS D&O Symposium, which will be held March 1-2, 2022, at the Marriott Marquis in New York. The event will held live this year. I have already registered and I hope many of you will also register and attend the event. It will be so great to see everyone again! To register and for other information, please refer here. Continue Reading PLUS D&O Symposium March 1-2, 2022 in New York

In my annual roundup of the issues to watch in the world of D&O that I posted early in the fall, I included in my list of topics the possibility of an increase in antitrust-related enforcement activity. I raised this concern in part because of fears arising from the emerging make-up of the Biden Administration’s antitrust regulatory team. For some readers, it may not have been apparent how these antitrust regulatory concerns might translate into D&O claims activity. Anyone looking for an example of how antitrust enforcement activity can lead to D&O claims will want to review the two shareholder derivative actions filed late last week against certain directors and officers of Alphabet, the parent of Google, as well as against directors and officers of Google itself. The complaints assert breach of fiduciary duty claims against the defendants relating to antitrust enforcement actions that have been filed against Alphabet and against Google by federal and state regulators. Continue Reading Alphabet’s Board Hit with Antitrust Enforcement Follow-On D&O Lawsuits

The “economic structure” of SPACs creates an ‘inherent conflict” between the SPAC sponsor and the SPAC’s public shareholders, according to a new paper from two leading law professors.  The conflict arises from the SPAC sponsor’s financial interest in completing a merger even if the merger is not value-creating, which may conflict with the shareholders’ interest in redeeming their shares if they believe that the proposed merger is disadvantageous. Because of the potential conflict, it is critical that the SPAC’s board independently reviews the proposed merger and inform shareholders about the merger with appropriate candor. However, if the board members’ compensation aligns their interests with those of the sponsor, the sponsor’s conflict could extend to the directors themselves – a circumstance the paper’s authors call the “epitome of bad governance.”

 

The solution, the authors suggest, is for the SPAC to structure the board members’ compensation in a way that aligns the directors’ financial interests with those of the shareholders. Moreover, the authors contend, courts reviewing shareholders’ allegations that a SPAC’s board members breached their fiduciary duties should consider the potential for conflict inherent in the SPAC’s structure and accordingly review the underlying circumstances using the “entire fairness” standard. These considerations are relevant to cases now pending in the Delaware courts, which have the potential to be “groundbreaking.” Stanford Law Professor Michael Klausner and NYU Law Professor Michael Ohlrogge’s November 19, 2021 paper entitled “SPAC Governance: In Need of Judicial Review” can be found here. Continue Reading SPACs’ Structural Conflicts, Shareholder Litigation, and Judicial Review

In a November 30, 2021 opinion (here), a Delaware Superior Court judge, applying Delaware law, held that the later investigations of the insured policyholder by two regulatory agencies were unrelated to an earlier investigation of the company by one of the agencies. In making this “relatedness” determination, the court declined to apply the “fundamentally identical” standard that some Delaware courts have applied to relatedness issues, but instead applied a “meaningful linkage” test. Because relatedness disputes are so frequent, and because Delaware’s court increasingly are becoming the forum in which insurance disputes are addressed, this court’s adoption of the revised relatedness standard court have important implications. Continue Reading D&O Insurance: Delaware Court Applied “Meaningful Linkage” Interrelated Claims Test

In 1520, the nearly-50-year-old German artist Albrecht Dürer travelled to the Low Countries. The Holy Roman Emperor Maximillian I had just died, and his grandson Charles V was about to be crowed in Aachen as his successor. Dürer, both fleeing plague in his hometown of Nuremberg and seeking to confirm with the new emperor the continuation of his pension, roamed widely for more than a year throughout what is now the Netherlands and Belgium. Dürer meticulously recorded his experience and observations in a journal that miraculously (and fortunately for us) has survived. As memorialized in the journal, the curiosity that guided Dürer’s path was frequently rewarded; among other things, he was among the first to see the incredible first shipment of Aztec treasures that Hernán Cortés shipped back to Europe from his first voyage to Mexico as they were unloaded in Antwerp. Continue Reading Sunday Arts: Albert and the Whale

Sarah Abrams

In the following guest post, Sarah Abrams, Head of PL Claims at Bowhead Specialty Underwriters, takes a look at the D&O insurance underwriting and claims implications of private equity investment in managed care organizations. I would like to thank Sarah 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 Sarah’s article. Continue Reading Guest Post: PE Investment in Healthcare and Impact to Managed Care Organization D&O

Companies in the pharmaceutical industry are frequent targets of securities class action lawsuits. In the following guest post, Tony Kriesel, Claims Specialist with IQUW; Elan Kandel, a Member of the Bailey Cavalieri law firm; and James Talbert, an Associate at Bailey Cavalieri, take a look at the reasons for the pharmaceutical industry’s high securities litigation frequency experience and at the implications of the lawsuit frequency for pharmaceutical companies and their insurers. They also consider the significance of the interrelated claims provision typically found in D&O insurance policies for securities claims involving pharmaceutical companies. I would like to thank the authors 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: D&O Risks and Challenges for Pharmaceutical Companies and their Insurers

The filing of data breach and other cybersecurity incident-related shareholder derivative lawsuits against corporate boards is nothing new; plaintiffs’ lawyers have been filing these kinds of claims now for several years. However, in recent months, the plaintiffs’ lawyers have shown an increasing inclination to file these claims based on allegations of breach of the duty of oversight. The latest example of this type of claim is the shareholder derivative suit filed this week against the board of T-Mobile USA. Although the plaintiff’s complaint does not expressly use the words “breach of the duty of oversight” or refer to “Caremark duties,” the complaint does refer to the board’s alleged “failure to monitor” and to the board’s alleged failure “to heed red flags” – the very kind of allegations that are at the heart of breach of the duty of oversight claims. A copy of the plaintiff’s complaint in the November 29, 2021 lawsuit can be found here. Continue Reading Data Breach-Related Derivative Suit Filed Against T-Mobile USA Board