LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom
D&O Insurance: Insured vs. Insured Exclusion Unambiguously Precludes Coverage for FDIC Failed Bank Lawsuit

One of the recurring D&O insurance coverage issues that has arisen during the current wave of failed bank litigation has been the question whether coverage for an action by the FDIC in its role as receiver of a failed bank against a failed bank’s directors and officers is precluded by the Insured...

Failed NC Bank Execs Granted Summary Judgment on All FDIC Claims

On September 11, 2014, in a sharply worded order that will give heart to the FDIC’s many other failed bank litigation targets, Eastern District of North Carolina Judge Terrence Boyle, applying North Carolina law, granted the summary judgment motion of the former directors and officers of the failed...

D&O Insurance: Insured vs. Insured Exclusion Applicability to FDIC Failed Bank Claim Held Ambiguous

As I have previously noted on this blog, one of the recurring D&O insurance coverage issues arising during the latest bank failure wave has been the question whether the Insured vs. Insured Exclusion precludes coverage for claims brought by the FDIC in its capacity as receiver for a failed bank against...

A Closer Look at an FDIC Failed Bank Lawsuit Settlement

According to the FDIC’s website ( here ), as of March 24, 2015, 44 of the 106 failed bank lawsuits the agency has filed have settled. So there is nothing particularly newsworthy about the fact that the parties to another one of the failed bank lawsuit had reached a settlement. Just the same, however...

Meanwhile, Back at the FDIC Failed Bank Litigation Ranch

As the global financial crisis has receded further into the past and as other issues have crowded to the top of the agenda, the remaining vestiges from the credit crisis have faded into the background. But though the peak of the crisis is now nearly seven years behind us, the crisis remnants continue...