Enforce: The Insurance Policy Enforcement Journal vol 12 | issue 1 Enforce vol 12 | issue 1 | Page 13

corporation agrees to waive the automatic stay so that proceeds can be used to fund the defense. Common Coverage Fights Former directors and officers of a bankrupt company face significant financial risk. Many of their prebankruptcy actions are carefully examined to determine if any actionable wrongful conduct contributed to or caused the insolvency, particularly in this era of heightened corporate scrutiny and accountability. When a bankruptcy trustee or other third party brings claims against a company’s former directors and officers, insurance companies often argue that such claims made on behalf of the bankruptcy estate trigger the so-called “insured versus insured” exclusion. Most courts note that the exclusion was originally intended to prevent collusive lawsuits brought by one insured against another to reap the benefits of the D&O policy. In bankruptcy, insurance companies seek to apply the exclusion to bar truly adversarial claims against directors and officers by arguing that a bankruptcy trustee, creditors’ committee or assignee of litigation rights stands in the debtor’s shoes for purposes of commencing actions, and are therefore an “insured” so that coverage might be denied the directors and officers under the exclusion. The majority of courts opining on this coverage defense have upheld the policyholder’s claim for insurance coverage, agreeing that there is no identity of interest between a trustee or other third party and the pre-petition debtor, and that the claims are being brought on behalf of creditors, not the debtor. Adding an express carveout to the insured-versus-insured exclusion that includes claims brought by a debtor-in-possession, a Chapter 11 trustee, creditors or other bankruptcy constituencies is a good way to avoid having to litigate this issue in the first place. Insurance companies should be receptive to incorporating these carve-outs because they do not affect the exclusion’s primary purpose of preventing collusive lawsuits. On the flip side, a fair number of D&O policies contain endorsements with a “bankruptcy” exclusion, which purports to preclude coverage for suits brought by a bankruptcy trustee that “arise out of ” a bankruptcy. Unfortunately, there is a split of authority on the enforceability of such exclusions. One line of cases holds that section 541(c) of the Bankruptcy Code invalidates contractual terms that are conditioned on the insolvency of the debtor or on the commencement of a bankruptcy case; hence, the exclusion is unenforceable. Other courts rely on contract interpretation to hold that broadly worded exclusions for actions “arising out of bankruptcy” should be enforced, but have not considered how section 541(c) might alter that analysis. Regardless, policyholders should carefully analyze whether such an exclusion should be included in their D&O policy. Be Vigilant! Policyholders must be particularly watchful when they attempt to navigate the intersection of bankruptcy and insurance, where many factions vie for critical insurance assets and insurance companies are looking to exploit the resulting chaos. Failure to be vigilant could leave you standing at the side of the road with no coverage when it is most needed. s Dennis J. Nolan is a shareholder in Anderson Kill’s New York office and chair of the firm’s Bankruptcy and Restructuring Group. Mr. Nolan concentrates his practice in bankruptcy and restructuring and insurance recovery, and has extensive experience representing debtors, creditors’ committees and unsecured creditors in complex Chapter 11 reorganizations. 212-278-1659 [email protected] Marshall Gilinsky is a shareholder in Anderson Kill’s Washington, DC, office and practices in the Insurance Recovery, Captive Insura nce and Commercial Litigation Groups. Mr. Gilinsky is a member of Anderson Kill’s Financial Services Industry Group, the Hospitality Industry Practice Group as well as the Banking and Lending group. He is an experienced commercial litigator who applies his complex analysis skills with extensive experience in insurance coverage analysis and litigation and dispute resolution. Mr. Gilinsky’s insurance coverage practice is focused on property insurance, commercial general liability insurance, errors and omissions, and directors’ and officers’ insurance. 202-416-6554 [email protected] VOLUME 12 | ISSUE 1 13