For many years, cybersecurity-related issues have been recognized as a potential source of D&O claims and liability. More recently, other D&O claims concerns, including artificial intelligence (AI), geopolitical issues, and even market manipulation allegations, have become more conspicuous, and cybersecurity-related issues have been less prominent. However, a securities suit filed earlier this month against Israeli-based web data collection company Alarum Technologies highlights that cybersecurity-related issues remain an important potential source of D&O claims and also shows how cybersecurity-related concerns continue to evolve. A copy of the August 5, 2026, complaint against Alarum can be found here.

Continue Reading Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities Lead to Securities Suit Against Israeli Company
Vijay Jyotish

In the following guest post, Vijay Jyotish, who writes on forecasting and decision-making under uncertainty, argues that launch-day decisions for self-insured space missions can expose companies to hundreds of millions of dollars in risk, yet often bypass board-level oversight because they are treated as engineering decisions rather than enterprise risks. The author contends that evolving Delaware case law increasingly requires boards to have documented systems for monitoring mission-critical risks, and recommends a process for recording and reviewing launch-day risk assessments before each launch. Our thanks to Vijay for allowing us to publish his article on this site. Here is Vijay’s article.

Continue Reading Guest Post: Board Oversight of Self-Insured Launch Risk

The wave of securities class actions alleging market manipulation involving recently public, low-float companies continues to grow. Notably, many of these lawsuits have involved non-U.S. companies that recently completed IPOs on U.S. exchanges. Two new pump-and-dump lawsuits, filed within a day of one another in the Southern District of New York against China-based iTonic Holdings Ltd. and Park Ha Biological Technology Co., Ltd., increase the number of market manipulation cases filed in 2026 to 13.

Continue Reading Pump-and-Dump Securities Suit Filing Trend Continues to Build
Paul Noon

In the following guest post, Paul Noon,  OBE, Emeritus Professor of AI and Innovation and former Deputy Vice Chancellor at Coventry University, argues that UK company directors face growing legal and governance risks from AI under both the UK Companies Act and the EU AI Act, whose broad extraterritorial scope can apply even to UK companies with no EU presence if their AI systems affect people in the EU. The author also considers the implications for U.K. boards. We would like to thank Paul for allowing us to publish his article on our site. Here is his article.

Continue Reading Guest Post: The UK Board’s AI Blind Spot

The D&O insurance implications of M&A litigation often extend beyond claims against the company and its directors and officers. When financial advisers are drawn into transaction-related litigation, companies that have agreed to indemnify them may be required to reimburse defense costs and settlement payments, raising questions about the extent to which those amounts could be covered under a public company D&O insurance program.

A pending coverage dispute arising out of Cornerstone Building Brands’ 2022 take-private transaction highlights those issues. At the center of the dispute is whether amounts a company pays to indemnify its financial adviser for defense costs and settlement payments constitute covered Loss under a public-company D&O policy.  Below is a discussion of Cornerstone’s coverage complaint, the parties’ competing summary judgment arguments, and potential D&O underwriting implications.

Continue Reading Coverage Dispute Tests Limits of Side C Coverage

In the following guest post, Javier Ybarra, Oswald Carvalho, and Sofia Garcia-Ollauri, all of Marsh Spain, consider a special feature of D&O insurance in Spain. Spain’s legal system allows civil damage claims to be pursued within criminal proceedings, which can lead courts to require directors and officers to post civil or bail bonds (“fianzas”) before liability is finally determined. As the authors discuss below, D&O insurers in Spain may be expected to provide or support these bonds, and companies with Spanish operations should ensure their D&O policies explicitly address bond coverage, reimbursement obligations, and related collateral requirements. Our thanks to the authors for allowing us to publish their article as a guest post on this site. Here is the authors’ article.

Continue Reading Guest Post: Are D&O Insurers Expected to Act as a “Bondsman” in Spain?

In a recent post (here), I wrote about a lawsuit that had just been filed against Microsoft’s board, alleging that the company’s directors had violated their fiduciary duties by knowingly allowing its AI development efforts to engage in copyright infringement. The case, I said, represented an example of “silent AI” – that is, the seepage of AI-related matters into various insurance coverages that were not consciously intended to provide coverage for certain exposures. The case showed how a matter that would not typically be covered under a D&O policy (copyright infringement) can translate into a potentially covered matter (a breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit).

In the latest example of this kind of lawsuit, a plaintiff shareholder has filed a derivative lawsuit against the board of Nvidia, alleging that its directors knowingly permitted its AI models to violate copyright holders’ rights and allowed violations of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA). Nvidia, the complaint alleges, has been the target of numerous copyright infringement actions, as well as class actions brought for alleged BIPA violations concerning individual voiceprints. The derivative lawsuit seeks to hold the company’s directors liable for the company’s “potentially massive liability and related costs and reputational damages” that the company faces in the underlying litigation. As discussed below, the new Nvidia derivative lawsuit, which may be found here, represents yet another example of “silent AI” in operation in the D&O context.

Continue Reading More About “Silent AI” and Follow-On D&O Litigation

As The D&O Diary has emphasized in numerous posts in recent months (most recently here), geopolitical issues represent an increasing source of D&O risk. The geopolitical issues include, among other things, sanctions, tariffs, and export controls. Another geopolitical issue that can have an impact on D&O risk is the enforcement of anti-money laundering (AML) laws. In the latest example of AML enforcement translating into D&O risk, in late July a plaintiff shareholder filed a securities class action lawsuit against British money transfer technology company Wise Group, a company whose U.S. bank charter application was denied due to AML concerns. A copy of the July 31, 2026, complaint can be found here.

Continue Reading Anti-Money Laundering Enforcement and Securities Litigation Risk

The latest episode of The D&O Diary Podcast is now available. Kevin LaCroix and Sarah Abrams are joined by their first podcast series guest, Marissa Streckfus, Vice President & Claims Manager at RT ProExec, to discuss the current private company D&O claims environment.

The conversation covers a range of topics, including private company business disputes, increasing antitrust exposures, bankruptcy-related claims, and the ways in which D&O policy structure can affect claims resolution. The episode also examines practical claims handling issues, including notice requirements, interrelated claims concerns, and other recurring coverage challenges.

Continue Reading The D&O Diary Podcast Series – Episode 5: Private Company D&O Claims
Benjamin Edwards
Nancy Rapoport

In the following guest post, Professors Benjamin Edwards and Nancy B. Rapoport, of Boyd School of Law, UNLV, present their views that a corporate law loophole in advancement and indemnification rules can force companies to pay exorbitant legal fees and even unreasonable personal expenses for directors’ defenses. The authors contend that courts should impose stricter scrutiny to prevent unethical billing practices and protect shareholders. We would like to thank Ben and Nancy for allowing us to publish their article as a guest post on this site. Here is their article.

Continue Reading Guest Post: Legal Fees and Expenses Gone Wild Thanks to a Corporate Law Loophole