Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 42

Ninth Circuit holds I v. I exclusion does not bar coverage; declines to determine exact meaning of “assistance”

Wiley Rein LLP
-
USA
-
March 11 2008

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, applying California law in an unpublished opinion, has held that a D&O insurer could not deny coverage based on an I v. I exclusion, even though two officers of the company provided information to an underlying plaintiff

Breach of notice provision precludes coverage under a claims-made policy, even in absence of prejudice

Wiley Rein LLP
-
USA
-
March 11 2008

The United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, applying Pennsylvania law, has held that a D&O policy does not afford coverage where the insured failed to provide notice of a claim under the policy, irrespective of whether the insurer was prejudiced

I v. I exclusion bars coverage where security holder assisted by an insured

Wiley Rein LLP
-
USA
-
March 11 2008

The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, applying Massachusetts law, has held that the insured vs. insured exclusion in a D&O policy precludes coverage for a lawsuit brought by a former security holder of the insured company with the assistance of a director of the company where the security holder owned stock and warrants at the time the operative claim was first made

Delaware Supreme Court rejects “no loss” argument even though directors indemnified by uninsured shareholder

Wiley Rein LLP
-
USA
-
August 13 2007

The Delaware Supreme Court, applying California law, has held that directors incurred "Loss" despite full indemnification of the insureds by a company's controlling shareholder

Rescission appropriate based on nondisclosure of demand letter in application

Wiley Rein LLP
-
USA
-
September 11 2009

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California, applying California law, has held that rescission of a directors' and officers' liability policy was appropriate based on the failure to disclose in the policy application a written demand letter alleging a breach of fiduciary duties by the insureds

Texas Supreme Court upholds insurer use of staff counsel

Wiley Rein LLP
-
USA
-
April 1 2008

On March 28, the Texas Supreme Court in Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee v. American Home Assurance Co., et al. held that insurers may use staff counsel to defend many insureds

Pennsylvania public policy does not bar coverage for breach of contract

Wiley Rein LLP
-
USA
-
July 20 2007

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, applying Pennsylvania law, has held that Pennsylvania public policy does not prohibit coverage for breach of contract claims under D&O policies

Eighth Circuit holds that D&O policy provides coverage for claims against directors based on both conduct and status as directors

Wiley Rein LLP
-
USA
-
April 16 2007

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, applying Arkansas law, has held that coverage under a D&O policy is not limited to claims based solely on directors' status as a director

District court denies rescission claim where evidence does not show material misrepresentation by policyholder

Wiley Rein LLP
-
USA
-
November 6 2007

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, applying Georgia law, has held that an insurer was not entitled to rescind a D&O policy, finding that the policyholder made no material misrepresentations in its renewal application even though the policyholder made an announcement shortly after renewing the policy that it would restate its earnings

No coverage for breach of contract claims against company and its officer

Wiley Rein LLP
-
USA
-
February 12 2007

A California intermediate appellate court, applying California law, has held that a professional liability policy does not afford coverage for breach of contract claims asserted against a company and one of its officers