The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, applying Florida law, has held that an insurer did not need to cover underlying litigation instituted against its insured during the policy period because related...more
The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, has held that a “prior acts” exclusion in a directors and officers policy did not bar coverage for settlements reached by the insured in two related shareholder lawsuits,...more
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, applying Louisiana law, has held that an insurer does not need to cover a monetary judgment rendered in favor of two former employees of the insured...more
3/22/2024
/ Bonuses ,
Breach of Contract ,
Commercial Insurance Policies ,
D&O Insurance ,
Declaratory Judgments ,
Duty to Defend ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Employment Practices Liability Insurance (EPLI) ,
Former Employee ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Insurance Claims ,
Money Judgment ,
Policy Exclusions ,
Policy Terms ,
Unpaid Wages ,
Wage and Hour
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, applying New York law, held that a former director is not entitled to injunctive relief requiring an excess D&O insurer to pay his defense costs because the director has not...more
A Florida federal district court has held that an insurer is entitled to rescind a directors and officers (D&O) policy it issued to its insured due to the insured’s misrepresentation of material facts on its application for...more
Applying California law, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has held that a goods and products exclusion in a D&O policy precluded coverage for costs related to complying with government subpoenas...more
The United States District Court for the Central District of California, applying California law, has held that a D&O insurer cannot rely on an excess “other insurance” provision to preclude a duty to defend. TriPacific...more
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, applying Missouri law, has held that a D&O insurer cannot rely on a contract exclusion to deny coverage for an underlying lawsuit, finding that multiple endorsements...more