Applying California law, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has held that a letter proposing an informal settlement received before the policy period constituted a claim, such that no coverage was available for subsequent related lawsuits.
Applying Illinois law, a federal district court has held that an insurer did not have a duty to defend or indemnify for a lawsuit that was filed and dismissed prior to the policy period and later refiled during the policy
Reversing the trial court, the Delaware Supreme Court has held that an appraisal proceeding does not constitute a “Securities Claim” under a D&O policy. In re Solera Insurance Coverage Appeals, Nos. 413,2019 and 418,2019 (Del. Oct. 23, 2020).
The United States District Court for the District of Kansas, applying Kansas law, has held that an excess E&O insurer was required to advance defense costs where coverage under a potentially responsive D&O policy had not yet been resolved and
The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, applying Washington law, has held that exclusions for false advertising and trademark infringement in a media liability policy did not bar defense coverage for a claim alleging that Expedia
A California federal court has held that a complaint alleging that a law firm was providing services in a non-legal capacity nonetheless triggered a duty to defend the firm under a lawyers’ professional liability policy, where the complaint also described
Applying New York law, a New York state trial court granted an insurer’s motion for summary judgment where an insured sought coverage under a private company D&O policy for a settlement it had paid for fraudulent filings for state construction
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, applying California law, has held that an excess insurer could not second-guess the payment decisions of underlying insurers absent a showing of fraud or bad faith, or a policy provision
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, applying New York law, has concluded that an insurer waived the right to assert a policy exclusion as a coverage defense in a declaratory judgment action after incorrectly denying
The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, applying New York law, has held that an Insured v. Insured exclusion (IvI Exclusion) in a D&O policy did not bar coverage for an action brought by a creditor trust against former directors