The past year included dramatic and important developments involving elections, tragedies and natural disasters. While there was nothing in the world of Directors and Officers Liability to match this drama, it was nevertheless an eventful year, with many significant developments. In the latest issue of InSIghts, which can be found here, I take
Book Review: “Director and Officer Liability in Financial Institutions”
A distinctive feature of the current wave of FDIC failed bank litigation is the aura of déjà vu surrounding the suits. The resemblance of the current lawsuits to those filed during the S&L crisis is uncanny. And not only are the suits similar, but in many instances they even involve the same lawyers as last
D&O Insurance: “Ambiguity” Whether Insured vs. Insured Exclusion Bars Coverage for FDIC’s D&O Claims
As I have discussed in prior posts (refer here for example), one of the recurring D&O insurance coverage issues that has arisen in connection with the FDIC’s failed bank litigation is the question whether or not the FDIC’s claims as receiver for the failed bank against the bank’s former directors and officers trigger the D&O
Top Ten D&O Stories of 2012
The year just finished included dramatic and important developments involving elections, tragedies and natural disasters. While there was nothing in the world of directors’ and officers’ liability to match this drama, it was nevertheless an eventful year in the world of D&O, with many significant developments. By way of review of the year’s events, here
New Zealand Appellate Court Overturns Controversial Decision Blocking D&O Defense Cost Reimbursement
An appellate court in New Zealand has “quashed” the controversial ruling of a lower court ruling that former directors of the defunct Bridgecorp companies are not entitled to defense expense reimbursement under the companies’ D&O insurance policy where the companies’ liquidators have raised (but not yet proven) claims against them exceeding the policy’s limits of
D&O Insurance: Professional Services Exclusion Does Not Preclude Coverage
In a December 6, 2012 opinion (here), a New York state court judge applying New York law has denied a D&O insurer’s motion seeking a summary judgment determination that its policy’s “professional services” exclusion precluded coverage for attorneys’ fees that the Andy Warhol Foundation incurred in defending claims brought by art owners disgruntled by
InSights: “What to Watch Now in the World of D&O”
Every fall, I assemble a list of the current hot topics in the world of Directors and Officers (D&O) Liability Insurance. While the past 12 months have not seen as many headline-grabbing D&O related events as in some past years, the issues that are currently unfolding have had a significant impact on the marketplace. In
Management Liability Insurance: Amounts Due Based on “Pre-Existing Duty” Not Covered Loss
An employer’s management liability insurance policy does not provide coverage for employees’ claims that – contrary to statutory requirements — the employer collected and failed to remit gratuities, because amounts owing due to a preexisting statutory duty do not represent covered loss, according to a recent decision of a Massachusetts federal court applying Massachusetts law.
D&O Insurance: When Can a D&O Insurer Recoup Amounts It Has Paid Out?
As Alison Frankel recently reported in her On the Case blog (here), the insider trading charges to which former Morgan Stanley hedge fund manager Joseph “Chip” Skowron pled guilty cost the company a lot of money. And, as demonstrated in the lawsuit the company recently filed against Skowron, Morgan Stanley wants its money
Professional Liability Insurance: The Antitrust Exclusion Isn’t Just About Antitrust Claims
Many professional liability insurance policies contain an exclusion that, though referred to as the antitrust exclusion, precludes coverage for a much broader array of claims than just claims alleging violation of the antitrust laws. A recent decision by the First Circuit, interpreting an Errors and Omissions insurance policy and applying Massachusetts law, in which the