Stephen Hourigan

In the following guest post, Stephen Hourigan argues that a key driver of D&O claim severity is not necessarily board ignorance or misconduct, but the delay between when warning signs are known somewhere within the organization and when they are effectively communicated to the board. Steve suggests that there are questions underwriters can ask to determine the effectiveness of information communication to corporate boards. Steve is the Founder and CEO of Heardsafe, LLC. Our thanks to Steve for allowing us to publish his article as a guest post on our site.

Continue Reading Guest Post: Governance Signal Decay as a D&O Severity Problem

In Episode 6 of the D&O Diary Podcast Series, we sit down with Dan Holloway, Head of Global Management Liability & Professional Indemnity at Allianz Commercial, to discuss the results of a recent global survey examining industry perspectives on AI and its impact on D&O liability and insurance.

The survey, conducted jointly by The D&O Diary and Allianz Commercial, gathered responses from 250 insurance professionals across the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, Canada, and 21 additional countries. Participants included insurers, brokers, and representatives of insured companies, providing a broad cross-section of views on the opportunities and risks presented by AI.

During our conversation, we discuss the survey’s key findings and what they reveal about market sentiment toward AI, including the growing consensus that AI presents both significant opportunities and meaningful governance challenges. We also examine how insurers are evaluating AI governance as part of the underwriting process, whether existing D&O insurance policy forms are adequate to address AI-related risks, and what AI may mean for the future direction of the D&O insurance marketplace.

While AI technology may be new, many of the risks associated with AI are fundamentally governance risks, making effective oversight, accountability, and risk management more important than ever.

🎧 Listen now on:

Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-d-o-diary-podcast/id1896880954?i=1000787185496

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/55DTcVBLwoiaTmWfYjHgoB?si=_KwVCEhaSduswZVvPv1C8g
đź“ş Watch now on YouTube: https://youtu.be/OGbnKqwCYAY

If you enjoy the podcast, please consider following the series and sharing it with colleagues. We also welcome your suggestions for future topics.

Follow Us on LinkedIn: The D&O Diary now has its own LinkedIn page. The D&O Diary’s LinkedIn page can be found here.

 

As we have noted on this site, the increasing number of AI-related corporate and securities lawsuit filings is one of the most important recent developments in the world of D&O liability and insurance. Among the AI lawsuits is a particular category of claims involving allegations against AI infrastructure companies. By way of example, last week, two AI infrastructure companies were hit with securities suits alleging that the companies overstated their business opportunities  arising from providing infrastructure to support the burgeoning AI  build-out. As discussed further below, these AI infrastructure lawsuits represent their own category of AI-related suit filings.

Continue Reading AI Infrastructure Companies Hit with Securities Suits     

Over the past year, market-manipulation lawsuits have become a growing feature of the securities litigation landscape, with plaintiffs targeting alleged spoofing, short-selling, pump-and-dump schemes, and other trading-related misconduct. The latest such case, filed on July 31, 2026, in the Middle District of Florida, names hedge fund Pentwater Capital Management and its founder, Matthew Halbower, as defendants (Pentwater SCA). The complaint alleges that they manipulated the market for Avis Budget Group (Avis) shares by orchestrating a short squeeze and then selling into the resulting price spike.

Unlike pump-and-dump securities suits premised on allegedly false or misleading statements, the Pentwater SCA is based on the defendants’ trading activity itself. The lawsuit arguably represents an example of a growing trend in market-manipulation-related securities class action litigation while underscoring an increasingly important issue for D&O underwriters: securities litigation risk arising not from disclosure deficiencies, but from market-structure and trading-related factors capable of driving extreme stock-price volatility.

A copy of the Pentwater SCA can be found here.

Continue Reading Short Squeeze Lawsuit Filed Against Pentwater Capital

The securities class action lawsuit filed against Intuit, Inc. on August 17, 2026, represents another notable development in one of the most significant securities litigation trends of the year. According to our count, the Intuit case is the 20th AI-related securities class action filed in 2026, underscoring the continued evolution of AI-related litigation beyond traditional allegations of AI-washing and overstated artificial intelligence capabilities.

Similar to the securities class action filed against ZoomInfo Technologies on July 13, 2026, the complaint against Intuit alleges that, while the company promoted the benefits of artificial intelligence, it failed to disclose the extent to which AI was simultaneously creating competitive pressures for key parts of its business.

A copy of the complaint filed against Intuit can be found here.

Continue Reading Intuit Hit with AI-Related Securities Suit
Nessim Mezrahi
Stephen Sigrist

In the following guest post, Nessim Mezrahi and Stephen Sigrist present their view that U.S. securities litigation risk is increasing significantly, driven by geopolitical instability and weakening investor confidence in the AI investment proposition, and that growing market capitalization losses, increased shareholder scrutiny, and the potential for an AI-related market correction are creating heightened securities litigation exposure. Nessim Mezrahi is co-founder and CEO, and Stephen Sigrist is a senior vice president, at SAR LLC. Our thanks to Nessim and Stephen for allowing us to publish their article on our site.

Continue Reading Guest Post:  Increasing Deterioration in U.S. Securities Litigation Risk

In the latest settlement in connection with the current Trump administration’s anti-DEI efforts, the audit and consulting firm Deloitte has agreed to pay $21.5 million to settle Department of Justice allegations that the firm violated the False Claims Act by allegedly continuing to consider diversity in hiring, promotion, and training decisions. This latest settlement has several interesting features and raises interesting questions, as discussed below.

Continue Reading Deloitte to Pay $21.5 Million to Settle DOJ Anti-DEI False Claims Act Allegations

Two notable securities litigation trends over the past year have been the rise of AI-related lawsuits and claims stemming from geopolitical developments, particularly U.S.-China tensions. A securities class action complaint filed on August 4, 2026, in the Southern District of New York against Alibaba Group Holding Limited (Alibaba) and the company’s CEO combines both themes in a single action (Alibaba SCA). The complaint alleges that Alibaba misled investors concerning both its AI-related activities and the risks associated with its alleged status as a “Chinese military company” under U.S. law.

Continue Reading Securities Suit Against Alibaba Combines Two Key Litigation Trends
Glenn Oborne

In the following guest post, Glenn Oborne, Director at Ingen Partners, a specialist governance recruitment and consultancy firm, argues that the greatest risk of a prolonged governance vacancy is not disruption of board administration, but the loss of continuity, oversight, and accountability that connects director questions, management commitments, and emerging warning signs across time. Even when meetings, reports, and compliance processes continue smoothly, fragmented responsibility can make it harder for boards to identify developing issues, demonstrate effective oversight, and defend their decision-making if later scrutinized by regulators or shareholders. Our thanks to Glenn for allowing us to publish his article on our site. Here is Glenn’s article.

Continue Reading Guest Post: The Oversight Risk in Governance Vacancies

A frequently recurring coverage issue litigated in Delaware courts is the treatment of related claims and the consequences that flow from a determination that multiple proceedings are related. A recent Delaware Superior Court decision revisits those issues, this time in a dispute involving an insurer’s reliance on related-claims language in a policy retention provision to deny coverage for a derivative action.

Continue Reading Delaware Court: Retention Provision Is Not a Related-Claims Exclusion