D&O insurance policies are key components of a corporation’s risk transfer portfolio, purchased to protect it against lawsuits presenting significant liability exposure to itself and its key officers and directors. In recent years, as an alternative to targeted formal litigation and discovery in uncovering corporate wrongdoing, federal and state governments have increasingly utilized informal investigations. This trend has created an expensive new financial exposure in the business world, particularly for large corporations, which are often the targets of such inquiries, and corresponding questions about how D&O insurance policies cover such costs. Although many D&O policies have evolved to explicitly protect policyholders from the costs of responding to government investigations, many have not been amended, forcing courts to determine whether the existing language is sufficient to trigger coverage. D&O policies traditionally define a “claim” as, in part, a “demand for monetary or non-monetary relief.” A number of courts have held that subpoenas issued in connection with government investigations constitute demands for “relief,” thereby triggering a “claim,” because a subpoena is in effect a demand for something due. See, e.g., Polychron v. Crum & Forster Ins. Companies, 916 F.2d 461, 463 (8th Cir. 1990) (“The defendants’ characterization of the grand-jury investigation as mere requests for information and an explanation underestimates the seriousness of such a probe.”); Minuteman Int’l, Inc. v. Great Am. Ins. Co., No. 03 C 6067, 2004 WL 603482, at *7 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 22, 2004) (finding that certain SEC subpoenas “were demands for relief in that they were demands for something due); Syracuse Univ. v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co., 975 N.Y.S.2d 370 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2013), aff’d, 976 N.Y.S.2d 921 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013). A recent decision in the Tenth Circuit, however, illustrates that some courts may not follow this approach, at least under the narrow circumstances present in that case. MusclePharm Corp. v. Liberty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. was an outgrowth of an investigation directed at MusclePharm, a nutritional supplement company, and several of its officers by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). In July 2013, MusclePharm received an order from the SEC directing the company to conduct a private investigation of potential violations of securities law and indicating that SEC officers might subpoena witnesses, seek evidence and require the production of documents. The order stated that “it should be understood that the [SEC] has not determined whether any of the persons or companies mentioned in the order have committed” any wrongful acts or violation of the law. Eventually, after MusclePharm incurred more than $3 million in costs in responding to SEC subpoenas and document requests, it settled with the SEC. MusclePharm sought coverage of more than $3 million in costs it incurred in responding to the SEC investigation under its D&O policy issued by Liberty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. The Liberty policy did not expressly define “claim” as including informal governmental investigations. It, did, however, define “claim” as a “written demand for monetary or non-monetary relief” against an insured. The principal dispute between MusclePharm and its insurer was whether the subpoenas issued by the SEC in the course of its investigation were demands for “non-monetary relief” that triggered Liberty’s duty to reimburse MusclePharm. The Tenth Circuit agreed with the carrier, rejecting the authorities holding that government subpoenas were demands for “relief.” The court justified its holding on two principal grounds. First, it turned to dictionary definitions of “relief” as a “legal remedy or redress” to conclude that subpoenas did not seek a remedy, but rather sought to investigate whether there was a basis for seeking a remedy at all. To the court, the fact that the subpoena itself could require action by the policyholder was not significant. Second, the court placed great weight on the fact that the SEC expressly stated that it had not determined that anyone had violated the law. Because the policy covered “claims” for “wrongful acts,” the court concluded that the SEC subpoenas were not “claims” because they expressly avoided making allegations of wrongdoing. While many courts have construed D&O policies as covering the policyholder’s costs of responding to government investigations, MusclePharm is a cautionary tale about how some courts may conclude there is no coverage under a particular set of facts. Indeed, the very efforts of the SEC in reassuring MusclePharm that there were no specific allegations of wrongdoing against anyone became a key basis on which the court ultimately concluded there was no coverage. While many D&O policies have specific language that expressly cover informal investigations and subpoenas, many do not. While the lack of such language does not necessarily result in an outcome like that in MusclePharm, policyholders should consider reviewing their coverage carefully and look closely at the choice-of-law analysis likely to apply to their policies, as these issues could affect the outcome in cases involving governmental subpoenas and investigations.
Tenth Circuit Holds that Governmental Investigation of Potential Criminal Violations is Not a ‘Claim’ Under a D&O Policy
John L. Corbett
PartnerRELATED ARTICLES
Should You Rely on Your Insurance Agent to Tell Insurance Company About a New Claim?
June 7, 2022 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance
When You Get Sued, Don’t Forget to Tell Your Insurance Company
June 1, 2022 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance
Can Insurance Cover False Claims Act Claims?
May 27, 2022 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance
D&O Policy ‘Related Claims’ Ruling Highlights Importance of How Your Policy is Written
March 23, 2022 | Policyholder Protection, do
Resolving Insurance Coverage Disputes – What Every Legal Department Should Know
March 11, 2022 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance
Should You Rely on Your Insurance Agent to Tell Insurance Company About a New Claim?
June 7, 2022 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance
When You Get Sued, Don’t Forget to Tell Your Insurance Company
June 1, 2022 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance
Can Insurance Cover False Claims Act Claims?
May 27, 2022 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance
D&O Policy ‘Related Claims’ Ruling Highlights Importance of How Your Policy is Written
March 23, 2022 | Policyholder Protection, do
Resolving Insurance Coverage Disputes – What Every Legal Department Should Know
March 11, 2022 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance
Mind the Gap: Coverage Gaps Created by Commercial General Liability Policies
October 15, 2021 | Policyholder Protection, Commercial General Liability
Interview With Greg Shantz, General Counsel of CertaPro Painters Ltd.
October 15, 2021 | Policyholder Protection
What’s Wrong With This Picture? Five Questions to Ask for Improving Contractual Indemnification Provisions
October 15, 2021 | Policyholder Protection, Policy
The Growing Science Behind Direct Physical Loss or Damage from COVID-19
August 2, 2021 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance, Property Insurance
This, That, and the Other: Different Insurance Policies Can Cover the Same Loss
June 21, 2021 | Policyholder Protection, Additional Insured, Insurance
State of the Law for Business Interruption Insurance Coverage for COVID-19 Claims
May 14, 2021 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance, Claims
Important Timing Considerations for COVID-19 Business Interruption Claims
April 27, 2021 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance, Policy
Parent Company Providing Workers Compensation Can’t Be Sued By Subsidiary’s Employee
March 3, 2021 | Construction Law, Policyholder Protection, Insurance Coverage, Contracts
The Growing Captive Insurance Market: Is It Right for Your Business Needs?
December 9, 2020 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance, Policy
The Right to Independent Counsel: What It Is and When You Should Demand It
December 7, 2020 | Policyholder Protection
COVID-19 and Business Interruption Insurance
December 7, 2020 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance, Policy
D&O Renewals in the Age of COVID-19
December 7, 2020 | Policyholder Protection, do, Insurance, Policy
Assessing the Value of Representations and Warranty insurance
December 4, 2020 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance
Case Summaries
December 10, 2019 | Policyholder Protection, Policy, Claims
An Appraisal Of The Appraisal Remedy In Property Insurance
November 26, 2019 | Policyholder Protection, Property Insurance
Coverage May Exist For Companies Facing Allegations Related To Sexual Abuse
November 19, 2019 | Policyholder Protection, Occurrence, Policy
Building An Insurance Bad Faith Case
November 14, 2019 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance
Interview With Laurence Midler
November 1, 2019 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance
The Negligent Breach of Contract Problem In Liability Insurance
September 30, 2019 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance
Privilege and Work Product in Insurance Coverage Disputes
September 3, 2019 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance
No Zebra or Leopard Prints: Insurance Company Must Repair Buildings to Match
August 26, 2019 | Construction Law, Policyholder Protection, Claims
Noise and the Decision to Settle Within Insurance Policy Limits
May 16, 2019 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance
Insurance Coverage for California Companies for Employee Sexual Misconduct Claims
May 3, 2019 | Policyholder Protection, Insurance
Is a Settlement of a Restitution Claim Covered If Your Policy’s Ill-Gotten Gains Exclusion Applies Only In the Event of a Final Adjudication?
June 11, 2018 | Indiana Insurance Coverage, Insurance, Policyholder Protection
New Year’s Resolutions for Policyholders
January 9, 2018 | Insurance, Policy, Policyholder Protection
Sold! Close Your M&A Deal Confidently by Funding Post-Closing Liabilities Through Insurance
January 2, 2018 | do, Insurance, Policyholder Protection
Payback: Can Settlements of False Claims Act Claims Be Covered Under D&O Policies?
December 26, 2017 | do, Insurance, Policyholder Protection
When Should an Accident be an Accident?
November 27, 2017 | Insurance, Policyholder Protection
Get Smart About Additional Insured Endorsements: Beware of the Proximate Cause Standard Recently Adopted in New York
June 26, 2017 | Additional Insured, Policyholder Protection
Why Indemnification Provisions are Important
June 2, 2017 | Insurance, Policyholder Protection
Check Your Policy When an Insurer Says a Self-Insured Retention Applies to Its Duty to Defend
May 30, 2017 | Duty To Defend, Policyholder Protection
Bad Faith Isn’t the Only Remedy
March 27, 2017 | Insurance, Policyholder Protection
Overcoming That Sinking Feeling
March 6, 2017 | Commercial General Liability, Policyholder Protection
Coverage for Commotion: Insurance for Businesses Affected By Rioting and Vandalism
February 8, 2017 | Insurance, Natural Disaster, Policyholder Protection
California Supreme Court Denies Insurance Industry’s Attempt to Deregulate Insurance in California
February 7, 2017 | Insurance, Policyholder Protection
Recent Trial Win Raises Interesting Issues on Relationship Between Insurance Agent and Policyholder
January 30, 2017 | Insurance, Policyholder Protection
Franchisors: Don’t Forget About Insurance for Joint Employer Liability Claims
January 27, 2017 | Insurance, Policyholder Protection
Exercise Your Bargaining Power at Renewal Time
November 28, 2016 | Insurance, Policyholder Protection
Upcoming Webinar on Aug. 23: What Keeps You Up At Night?
August 17, 2016 | Insurance, Policyholder Protection
Insurance, Indemnification, and Limitation of Liability Provisions in Business Contracts
August 8, 2016 | Insurance, Policyholder Protection
Are You Prepared for a Natural Disaster?
March 25, 2016 | Insurance, Policyholder Protection
Capitalizing on Sites with Environmental Property Damage: Is there really a pot of gold at the end of that rainbow?
March 15, 2016 | Insurance, Policyholder Protection
Join us: Insurance Considerations in Mergers and Acquisitions
March 7, 2016 | Insurance, Miscellaneous, Policyholder Protection
Andy Detherage and Charlie Edwards present Lessons from a Recent $204 Million Jury Verdict Against 17 Insurers
December 16, 2015 | Insurance, Policyholder Protection
2.4 Million Reasons to Monitor Claim Costs: Five Lessons From a Barnes & Thornburg Victory
November 16, 2015 | Claims, Policyholder Protection
Now available for viewing - Insurance Law Webinar: You’re Covered, But...
September 8, 2015 | Insurance, Policyholder Protection
Join Us for an Insurance Law Webinar: You're Covered, But...
August 4, 2015 | Miscellaneous, Policyholder Protection
Best Practices in Managing Insurance Claims
April 17, 2015 | Claims, Policyholder Protection
Ken Gorenberg to speak at Chicago Bar Association seminar, “Insurance and Risk Management for Corporate Transactions”
April 15, 2015 | Insurance, Risk Management, Policyholder Protection
Thankful for Our Policyholder Clients and Insurance Professional Colleagues
November 26, 2014 | Miscellaneous, Policyholder Protection
Do We Have Coverage for This? Sometimes it's worth getting a second opinion
November 25, 2014 | Claims, Policyholder Protection
Scott Godes to Speak About Insurance Coverage for Asbestos Claims at ACI’s 18th National Advanced Forum on Asbestos Claims & Litigation
November 17, 2014 | Claims, Policyholder Protection
(E)stop, Hey, What’s That Sound? Insurers Get What’s Going Down
September 23, 2014 | Additional Insured, Policyholder Protection
Join us Sept. 25 for Barnes & Thornburg’s National Insurance Recovery Seminar
September 18, 2014 | Miscellaneous, Policyholder Protection
RELATED PRACTICE AREAS
Subscribe
Do you want to receive more valuable insights directly in your inbox? Visit our subscription center and let us know what you're interested in learning more about.
View Subscription Center