Tag Archives: consent to settlement

D&O Insurer’s Withholding of Settlement Consent Held Reasonable

D&O insurance policies typically specify that the insurer’s written consent is required for a policyholder to settle a claim, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. This consent-to-settlement clause is the not infrequent source of coverage disputes, usually involving circumstances where the policyholder has gone ahead and settled a claim without seeking the requisite consent. … Continue Reading

Insurer’s Coverage Denial Relieves Policyholder’s Obligation to Obtain Consent to Settlement

In the latest development in the long-running battle of J.P. Morgan Chase, as successor in interest to Bear Stearns, to try to obtain insurance coverage for amounts Bear Stearns paid to resolve an SEC investigation of alleged deceptive market timing and late trading activities, a New York state court judge has held that because its … Continue Reading

D&O Insurance: Insured That Settled Underlying Claim Without Insurer’s Consent Cannot Sue the Insurer for Breach of Contract or Bad Faith

The Georgia Supreme Court has held that where a policyholder settled an underlying claim without its D&O insurer’s consent, the policyholder cannot sue the carrier for breach of contract or for bad-faith failure to settle. The Court, applying Georgia law, entered its opinion in the case based on questions certified from the United States Court … Continue Reading

D&O Insurance: Coverage for SafeNet Options Backdating Securities Suit Settlement Denied

The options backdating scandal may now be ancient history, but questions surrounding insurance coverage for the scandal’s consequences apparently continue to live on. In a September 9, 2011 opinion applying Maryland law, Southern District of New York Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald ruled in a coverage action brought by SafeNet’s excess D&O insurer that, among many … Continue Reading

D&O Insurer “Cut Out” of Settlement Process May Reasonably Withhold Consent

In prior posts (refer here), I have observed that the D&O insurer’s consent to settlement really is required. An August 10, 2009 decision by the Delaware Supreme Court (here) confirms that not only is the insurer’s consent required, but the D&O insurer may under certain circumstances reasonably withhold its consent to settlement. The Court, applying Missouri … Continue Reading

D&O Insurance: Consequences of Withheld Settlement Consent

In prior posts (here and here), I discussed two recent decisions in which courts held that D&O insurance coverage was precluded for settlements the insureds entered without first obtaining the insurers’ consent as required under the applicable policies. An August 19, 2008 Second Circuit opinion (here) addressed the related question of what happens when the … Continue Reading

Fiduciary Liability: Seventh Circuit Upholds Arthur Anderson’s Insurer’s Coverage Denial

In an April 9, 2008 opinion (here) written by Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook, the Seventh Circuit held that there was no coverage under Arthur Anderson’s fiduciary liability policy for the firm’s settlement of a retiree pension benefits dispute. The dispute arose after the firm’s Enron-related difficulties undercut the firm’s ability to honor retirees’ demands for … Continue Reading
LexBlog