麻豆映画

In this issue:

• EXCESS CARRIERS CANNOT CHALLENGE PAYMENTS OF UNDERLYING INSURERS
• COURT REJECTS NUMEROUS ATTEMPTS BY D&O INSURER TO DENY COVERAGE UNDER A-SIDE COVERAGE
• UNDISCLOSED RISK BEFORE THE PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY POLICY鈥橲 INCEPTION IS THE PATHWAY TO RESCISSION LITIGATION
• D&O INSURERS OF A PHARMACY TO PAY ONE OF THE LARGEST DERIVATIVE SETTLEMENTS RELATING TO OPIOID LITIGATION
• MASSACHUSETTS SUPREME COURT FINDS WIRETAP LAWS FAIL TO SUPPORT WEBSITE TRACKING SOFTWARE CLAIMS
• COVERAGE DENIED FOR LATE NOTICE

In this issue:

• D&O CARRIER CANNOT DENY COVERAGE BASED ON INSURED VERSUS INSURED EXCLUSION DUE TO BANKRUPTCY EXCEPTION
• EXCESS CARRIERS WITH AN EXPRESS DISCLAIMER ON DUTY TO DEFEND ARE NOT REQUIRED TO ADVANCE DEFENSE COSTS
• INSURER CANNOT DENY COVERAGE FOR DEFENSE COSTS BASED ON BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCLUSION DUE TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EXCEPTION
• COURT HOLDS THAT LATE NOTICE PREJUDICED AN EXCESS CARRIER AND RELIEVES CARRIER FROM PROVIDING A DEFENSE
• THE IMPORTANCE OF INDEMNIFICATION PROVISIONS IN CONTRACTS WITH THIRD PARTY VENDORS
• NO COVERAGE FROM EXCESS INSURERS UNTIL EXHAUSTION IS SHOWN
• FTC SETTLEMENT WITH HOTEL CHAIN PLACES CYBERSECURITY IN FOCUS

In this issue:

• ARBITRATION PROVISION IN D&O INSURANCE POLICY DOES NOT APPLY TO DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS
• NETWORK-SECURITY INSURANCE CARRIER HAD A DUTY TO REIMBURSE AND DEFEND THE INSURED
• EXCESS CARRIER HAD NO OBLIGATION TO PAY BASED ON ANTITRUST EXCLUSION AND EXHAUSTION
• ILLINOIS AMENDS HUMAN RIGHTS ACT CREATING LIABILITY FOR EMPLOYERS鈥� USE OF AI
• CIRCUIT COURT CONSIDERS WHETHER INSUREDS鈥� NOTICE WAS TIMELY UNDER NEW YORK CONTRACT STATUTE
• 9TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS APPLIED 鈥淧URCHASER-SELLER RULE鈥� TO BAR CLAIMS BROUGHT BY SPAC INVESTORS
• COURT REVIVES PRIVACY CLASS ACTION AGAINST A LEADING SEARCH ENGINE

In this issue:

• AMENDMENT TO BIPA OFFERS POTENTIAL RELIEF TO EMPLOYERS
• CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT RULES IN FAVOR OF APP-BASED
• TRANSPORTATION COMPANIES BY UPHOLDING GIG WORKER LAW
• CROWDSTRIKE OUTAGE SHOULD PROMPT INSUREDS TO REVIEW THEIR POLICY WORDING
• IN TEXAS, DENIAL OF COVERAGE BASED ON MATERIAL MISREPRESENTATION REQUIRES INTENT TO DECEIVE
• FEDERAL COURT RULES IN FAVOR OF INSURER REGARDING LATE NOTICE AND PRIOR KNOWLEDGE EXCLUSION
• NEW YORK FINANCIAL REGULATORS TACKLE USE OF AI BY INSURANCE INDUSTRY
• NO-ACTION CLAUSE IS NOT AN ESCAPE FROM THE DUTY TO DEFEND

In this issue:

• SUPREME COURT ENDS CHEVRON DEFERENCE
• COVERAGE NEUTRALITY 鈥� DISTRICT COURT RULES THAT INSURER CANNOT IMPROPERLY INTERVENE IN INSUREDS鈥� INTERNAL BOARD DISPUTES
• D&O PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EXCLUSION BARS COVERAGE FOR SOFTWARE DESIGN
• INSURERS COULD NOT WITHOLD CONSENT TO A SETTLEMENT UNREASONABLY, BUT WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?
• SECOND CIRCUIT REINFORCED SHAREHOLDER STANDING TO ASSERT SHORT-SWING PROFIT CLAIMS UNDER SECTION 16(B)
• A FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT BROADLY APPLIED THE BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCLUSION
• SECOND CIRCUIT RULES AGAINST THE ENFORCEABILITY OF ARBITRATION CLAUSES IN ERISA PLANS
• OTHER INSURANCE CLAUSE RELIEVES INSURER OF ITS DUTY TO DEFEND OBLIGATIONS

• SUPREME COURT PERMITS INSURER TO CHALLENGE PROPOSED CHAPTER 11 PLAN
• PANDEMIC RELATED BUSINESS INCOME LOSS IS NOT RECOVERABLE UNDER PROPERTY INSURANCE
• PENDING AND PRIOR LITIGATION EXCLUSION TRIGGERED BY QUI TAM ACTION
• MAJOR HOSPITAL SYSTEM HIT BY CYBERATTACK
• CYBER POLICY CORRECTLY OFFSETS PORTION OF NORMAL OPERATING EXPENSES
• COLORADO ENACTS FIRST IN THE NATION LAW GOVERNING THE
  USE OF AI

• DELAWARE CLARIFIES CONTROLLING STOCKHOLDERS鈥� FIDUCIARY DUTIES
• NO COVERAGE UNDER E&O POLICY FOR A PAYMENT TO GOVERNMENT AGENCY FOLLOWING AN INVESTIGATION
• SECURITIES CLASS ACTION AND SUBSEQUENT GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATIONS ARE NOT RELATED;
• TWO POLICY PERIODS TRIGGERED TO COVER LOSS
• IN ESOP LITIGATION, DUTY TO DEFEND LASTS AS LONG AS COVERED ALLEGATIONS DO, EVEN IN LIGHT OF OVERBROAD EXCLUSIONS
• BAD FAITH ALLEGATION BY INSURED REQUIRED TO TRIGGER COVERAGE UNDER INSURANCE COMPANY'S PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY POLICY
• BANKRUPTCY COURT DECISION ALLOWS CREDITOR鈥橲 COMMITTEE DERIVATIVE ACTIONS AGAINST INSOLVENT LLC DEBTORS
• THIRD CIRCUIT LOWERS STANDARD OF REVIEW FOR SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE SUITS
• NON-ACTION AND PRIOR ACTS CLAUSES BAR D&O COVERAGE

• UPDATE: A FEDERAL COURT DECIDES BUMP-UP EXCLUSION BARS COVERAGE UNDER D&O POLICY FOLLOWING A MERGER
• INSURERS AVOID COVERAGE BASED ON CHANGES IN EXPOSURE PROVISION
• AN INDEMNIFICATION CONTRACT REQUIRES AN OUT-OF-POCKET LOSS
• SECOND CIRCUIT PRECLUDES COVERAGE UNDER A DUTY TO DEFEND POLICY IF THE BANKRUPTCY/INSOLVENCY EXCLUSION IS TRIGGERED
• TRIGGERING THE PRIOR ACTS EXCLUSION IS A HIGH BAR FOR INSURERS TO MEET
• EXCESS D&O INSURER鈥橲 RELATED CLAIMS ARGUMENT FAILS
• INSURER SHOULD ACCEPT COVERAGE UNLESS IT IS ABLE TO SHOW THAT COVERAGE IS EXPRESSLY EXCLUDED
• FIFTH CIRCUIT LIMITS THE BROAD APPLICATION OF THE CONTRACT EXCLUSION
• 2ND CIRCUIT RULES PRE-SUIT DEMAND LETTER CONSTITUTES A CLAIM
• NON-PARTY TO PROFESSIONAL LIABILTIY POLICY CANNOT SEEK CONTRIBUTION FROM INSURER

• SPAC INSURERS CANNOT AVOID ADVANCEMENT OF DEFENSE COSTS BASED ON CHANGE-IN-CONTROL EXCLUSION
• LATE NOTICE RESULTS IN NO COVERAGE UNDER CLAIMS-MADE POLICY
• PLAINTIFFS LAWYER鈥橲 LETTER WARNING OF POTENTIAL LITIGATION IS NOT A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES
• IN TEXAS, ONLY SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS RESULTING FROM AN ADVERSARIAL PROCESS MAY BIND LIABILITY INSURERS
• THIRD CIRCUIT DENIES EN BANC REHEARING REQUEST FOR A PHARMACEUTICAL DRUG MANUFACTURER
• PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY POLICY RESCINDED FOR MISSTATEMENT IN APPLICATION UNDER VIRGINIA LAW

• THE SUPREME COURT ESTABLISHES A WHISTLEBLOWER-FAVORING FRAMEWORK FOR SARBANES-OXLEY ACT VIOLATIONS
• CALIFORNIA JURY AWARDS SHAREHOLDERS $14.1 MILLION IN DAMAGES AFTER BUYOUT DEEMED MISLEADING AND UNFAIR
• EXCESS CARRIER HAS NO DUTY TO DEFEND BASED ON 鈥淥THER INSURANCE鈥� CLAUSE
• COURT FINDS COVERAGE FOR LOSSES LEADING BACK TO A SYSTEM FAILURE
• PONZI SCHEME FRAUDULENT TRANSFER INSURABLE AND NOT BARRED BY LENDING ACTS EXCLUSION
• A CONDITION PRECEDENT IN EXCESS POLICIES CAN LEAD TO COVERAGE BEING DENIED
• THE OBJECTIVE/SUBJECTIVE TEST FOR PRIOR KNOWLEDGE EXCLUSIONS
• WHETHER AN INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR IS TRULY INDEPENDENT IS A HIGHLY FACT-SPECIFIC QUERY

• THE DEFINITION OF A SECURITIES CLAIM, NOT ALWAYS EASY TO KNOW
• COURT OF CHANCERY DISMISSES DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO PLEAD DEMAND FUTILITY
• THE INTERPLAY OF RELATED CLAIMS AND PRIOR NOTICE EXCLUSION
• ONEROUS PLEADING BURDEN IMPOSED FOR A CAREMARK BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY CLAIM AGAINST AN OFFICER
• WHEN DOES A CIVIL INVESTIGATION DEMAND BECOME A CLAIM TO ALLOW DEFENSE COSTS TO ERODE THE RETENTION
• AN INDICTMENT NOT DEMANDING RELIEF IS NOT A 鈥淐LAIM鈥� UNDER A PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY POLICY