One of the perennial issues involving D&O insurance coverage in the bankruptcy context is the question whether the directors and officers of the corporate debtor can tap the insurance policy to pay their defense expenses in connection with claims filed against them in their capacities as executives of the corporate entity. These issues have arisen once again in the bankruptcy proceedings of the corporate parent of Silicon Valley Bank, SVB Financial Group, where the bank’s directors and officers found themselves compelled to petition the bankruptcy court to lift the stay in bankruptcy in order for the bank’s insurers to pay the individuals’ defense expenses.
While there is nothing novel about the bankruptcy court’s order granting the stay, both the high-profile nature of the proceedings and the critical importance of the issues involved warrant taking a closer look at what unfolded in that case. A copy of the bankruptcy court’s May 22, 2023, order in the case can be found here. An August 23, 2023, memo from the Foley Hoag law firm about the court’s decision can be found here.Continue Reading SVB Bankruptcy Court Lifts Stay to Allow Insurance to Pay Individuals’ Defense Expenses
In an interesting decision that touches on a number of basic D&O insurance coverage issues, a federal district court judge applying Oklahoma law has ruled that a company’s management liability insurance policy does not provide coverage for legal expenses a former company executive incurred in a declaratory judgment action that had been filed by another company executive to determine the parties’ rights under a profit sharing agreement. The court concluded that there was no coverage because the individual seeking coverage had not been named as a defendant in the lawsuit by reason of his status as an insured person. Even more interestingly, the court concluded further that, even though the individual had been named as a defendant in the declaratory judgment lawsuit, he had not incurred “Defense Expenses” in the lawsuit, and therefore suffered no “Loss.” Western District of Oklahoma Judge 
In an interesting opinion, the Fifth Circuit has set aside a settlement and related bar order that had been approved by the district court in litigation arising out of the 
The right of shareholders to demand inspection of companies’ books and records is of course nothing new. What is new is the increased frequency of books and records demands, often as a result of courts’ requirement for prospective shareholder claimants to investigate alleged misconduct of corporate executives before filing a lawsuit. The scope of the books and records requests is also expanding as well. These developments raise a number of D&O insurance coverage issues, which in turn has led to the rise of a variety of policy wording alternatives, as discussed in a recent paper.
In a December 23, 2013 ruling that will be surprising and unwelcome to D&O insurers and their insureds in New Zealand (and perhaps elsewhere) , the New Zealand Supreme Court has reversed the holding of an intermediate appellate court and ruled that, by operation of a statutory “charge” on insurance in favor of third party
The modern public company D&O insurance policy provides coverage not only for the directors and officers of the company but also for the company itself – however, in the public company D&O insurance policy, the entity coverage applies only to securities claims, a limitation that sometimes leads to disputes whether or not a particular matter
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