As I have noted in numerous posts on this site (most recently here), plaintiffs’ lawyers seem drawn to filing D&O claims against companies that have experience cybersecurity incidents. But as I have also noted, the plaintiffs’ lawyers’ track record in these cases is not particularly good. However, as discussed in the following guest post by Jarett Sena, Director of Litigation Analysis, ISS Securities Class Action Services, the cybersecurity-related securities class action lawsuit pending against SolarWinds recently resulted in a significant and noteworthy settlement. This article previously was published on ISS Securities Services’ ISS Insights. I would like to thank Jarett and ISS Securities Class Action Services for allowing me to publish this 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 Jarett’s article.
Continue Reading Guest Post: SolarWinds Agrees to $26 Million Payout Over Massive Data Breach
As part of a continuing series of recordings, I have been participating in sessions the Professional Liability Underwriting Society (PLUS) has organized discussing the potential D&O liability and insurance issues arising out of the coronavirus outbreak and the related economic disruption. In each session in the series I have been joined by my good friends
As I have noted in numerous post on this blog (most recently 
The risk of extreme weather events resulting from climate change and the collective global failure to address climate change represent the most significant current global risks, according to the World Economic Forum’s annual survey of global risks. These kinds of risks represent significant concerns for human safety, social and business disruption, and property loss. As discussed below, and as recent claims have shown, these risks may present management liability concerns as well. The World Economic Forum’s January 15, 2019 Global Risks Report can be found 
Alleged deficiencies in climate change-related disclosures have been a target of advocacy groups, shareholders, and regulators. The latest example of this phenomenon is the civil lawsuit the New York Attorney General filed on Wednesday against Exxon Mobil Corporation. The NYAG alleges that the company sought to “systematically and repeatedly deceive investors” about the future impacts climate change regulation could have on the company’s assets and value. The lawsuit underscores the fact that climate change disclosures are and will remain under scrutiny and that the claims alleging insufficient or deceptive climate change-related disclosures remain a significant area of corporate liability exposure. The October 24, 2018 complaint can be found 
The news headlines have been dominated in recent days by appalling revelations that leading politicians, entertainers, political candidates and others have engaged in sexual harassment, assault, and even worse behavior. As these stories have emerged, a dynamic has evolved in which the victims come forward with their stories and seek to hold the wrongdoers accountable for their misconduct. Now, a blockbuster settlement entered on Monday suggests that this dynamic may not be limited just to attempting to hold individuals to account but may also involve efforts to hold the wrongdoers’ companies’ executives accountable for allowing the misconduct or for turning a blind eye.
When private companies are on track toward a planned IPO, much of the focus and attention is on readying the company for the burdens and responsibilities it will face as a public company. Among other things, this also means a focus on the potential liability exposures for the company and its directors and offices once the company goes public. Until the company actually completes its planned offering, however, it is still a private company — albeit one with a heightened set of risk exposures because of the company’s pre-IPO activities. If the planned IPO never happens, the company and its senior officials sometimes face liability claims arising from pre-IPO activities. A recent complaint filed in the Northern District of California against the former directors and officers of a pre-IPO company that ultimately went bankrupt illustrates the kind of claims pre-IPO companies and their executives can face. Pre-IPO companies’ liability exposures have important implications for the companies’ D&O insurance programs, as discussed below.
Those of us involved in the world of D&O liability insurance are well aware that the coverage issues often are technical and the relevant legal principles can change quickly as a result of evolving case law. It would be valuable for practitioners in this area to have access to a reliable resource where the key principles are described and where the key case law authority can quickly be located. Fortunately, there is such a resource. It is the “Directors & Officers Liability Deskbook” (about which refer