Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 25

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The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, applying California law in an unpublished opinion, has held that a D&O insurer could not deny coverage based on an I v. I exclusion, even though two officers of the company provided information to an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

US securities fraud class litigation

Mills & Reeve LLP
-
USA
-
February 19 2008

The decision of the US Supreme Court in Stoneridge Investment Partners v Scientific Atlanta Inc has been welcomed by insurers

Adviser charged with fraud in connection with insured investment scheme

Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
-
USA
-
December 27 2007

The SEC brought an administrative action against National Investment Advisors, Inc. (NIA) and its principal, Douglas A. Jimerson

D&O policy’s fraud exclusion did not bar coverage for securities class action settlement because there was no finding of fraud in the underlying action

Wiley Rein LLP
-
USA
-
August 11 2008

A Delaware Superior Court, applying New York law, has held that coverage for a securities class action settlement was not barred by a fraud exclusion in a D&O policy issued to AT&T because there was no "finding" or "adjudication" of fraud in the underlying action

Insurer enjoined from ceasing advancement of defense expenses on ground that money laundering exclusion barred coverage

Wiley Rein LLP
-
USA
-
March 1 2010

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, applying Texas law, has granted a request for a preliminary injunction prohibiting a D&O insurer from ceasing the advancement of defense expenses

Be careful before signing that warranty letter

Jorden Burt LLP
-
USA
-
March 4 2010

In Rivelli v Twin City Fire Insurance Co, the plaintiffs, who were directors or officers at Fischer Imaging Co. (Fischer), sought to compel their excess D&O insurer, Twin City Fire Insurance Co. (Twin City), to advance costs to defend against an SEC civil enforcement action alleging securities fraud

Insurer required to provide a defense to defendants in Ponzi scheme litigation

Ballard Spahr LLP
-
USA
-
January 6 2010

The question regularly arises in securities fraud litigation: are defense costs covered under the applicable insurance policies?

Release for settled securities claim precluded coverage for related ERISA claim

Wiley Rein LLP
-
USA
-
September 16 2008

The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, applying Indiana law, has held that an ERISA class action was related to a settled securities class action and that a release between the insurer and insured precluded coverage for the ERISA suit

Madoff and Stanford: new ways of resolving the same old issues

RPC
-
United Kingdom, USA
-
February 3 2010

The arrests of Bernard Madoff and Allen Stanford in December 2008 and June 2009 respectively, and the resulting litigation and investigations, have prompted a raft of notifications to D&O, PI and FidelityBBB policies since late 2008

ASIC fails to build case against Fortescue CEO

Norton Rose LLP
-
Australia
-
July 29 2010

The corporate regulator's recent track record in relation to the prosecution of directors continued on 23 December 2009 when Justice Gilmour of the Federal Court handed down judgment in Australian Securities & Investments Commission v Fortescue Metals Group Ltd

next >

Search results

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

US securities fraud class litigation

Adviser charged with fraud in connection with insured investment scheme

D&O policy’s fraud exclusion did not bar coverage for securities class action settlement because there was no finding of fraud in the underlying action

Insurer enjoined from ceasing advancement of defense expenses on ground that money laundering exclusion barred coverage

Be careful before signing that warranty letter

Insurer required to provide a defense to defendants in Ponzi scheme litigation

Release for settled securities claim precluded coverage for related ERISA claim

Madoff and Stanford: new ways of resolving the same old issues

ASIC fails to build case against Fortescue CEO

Current Search

Suggested Facets

Author

Firm Name

Jurisdiction

Workarea