A D&O policy’s capacity exclusion bars coverage for claims alleging that an insured director or officer acted in a dual capacity for insured and uninsured entities, according to the Supreme Court of New Jersey’s ruling in Mist Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Berkley Insurance Company, 355 A.3d 253 (N.J. 2026).
Latest Post
More Posts
New York Federal Court Holds Run-Off Policy’s Subsequent Acts Exclusion Inapplicable Because Conduct Alleged After Cut-Off Date Was Lawful and Not a “Wrongful Act”
Eleventh Circuit: Misappropriation Exclusion Doesn’t Bar Duty to Defend Under Georgia Law
Sixth Circuit Holds Under Michigan Law That Insurer May Recoup Defense Costs Paid Subject to a Reservation of Rights Without Express Policy Language Authorizing Reimbursement
First Circuit Strictly Enforces Claims Made and Reported Policy Terms and Finds Actual Notice of Claim Insufficient to Excuse Failure to Comply With Notice Requirements
Eleventh Circuit Holds That Georgia Law Does Not Require Reimbursement of Defense Costs Paid Subject to a Reservation of Rights Absent Policy Language Requiring Reimbursement
Fourth Circuit Holds That Reverse Triangular Merger Was Acquisition of Insured Entity for Purpose of Subject D&O Policy’s Bump Up Provision
Fourth Circuit Holds Government Investigation Costs Are Not Covered Under Lawyers Professional Liability Policy Because Search Warrant and Target Conflict Letters Are Not Claims Against An Insured
Ninth Circuit Holds That California Insurance Code Section 533 Bars Indemnity Coverage for Employment Retaliation Claims
California Federal Court Holds That Settlement of Post-Merger Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claim Brought Against Acquired Company’s Directors Is Not Covered by Its D&O Policy
Subscribe: Subscribe via RSS
Firm/Org