![(L-R)Courtney Horrigan, Dominic Rupprecht and Zachary Roman of Reed Smith. Courtesy photos](http://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/402/2021/07/Horrigan-Rupprecht-Roman-767x633.jpg)
Insurance Coverage for Entity Investigations
The costs of responding to a government subpoena or investigative demand can be substantial. The broadly worded demands for information or testimony typically require burdensome searches through mountains of documents, data, and electronically stored information.
July 26, 2021 at 01:35 PM
7 minute read
The costs of responding to a government subpoena or investigative demand can be substantial. The broadly worded demands for information or testimony typically require burdensome searches through mountains of documents, data, and electronically stored information. With the looming threat of civil or administrative actions against the company and its executives—and possible referral to the Department of Justice for criminal proceedings—a misstep in responding to a subpoena or investigative demand can be devastating.
As subpoena-response costs rise into the millions of dollars, the question inevitably rises: Will the company's director's and officer's (D&O) or professional liability insurance cover the costs of responding to the subpoena or civil investigative demand? The answer to this question is not always clear. Given the high stakes, insurers and policyholders frequently litigate this issue, with courts across the country reaching different outcomes depending on the unique terms, definitions, and conditions of the policies at issue. Two recent decisions addressing insurance coverage for the costs of responding to government subpoenas—one finding coverage and the other rejecting it—provide helpful guidance for policyholders seeking coverage for these costs.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All![The Coordinate Jurisdiction Rule on Insurance Bad Faith Litigation The Coordinate Jurisdiction Rule on Insurance Bad Faith Litigation](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/thelegalintelligencer/contrib/content/uploads/sites/402/2024/01/Haggerty-Coyne-Stanton-767x633-2.jpg)
![Waiving a Liability Insurer’s Right to Subrogation—Is It Appropriate? Waiving a Liability Insurer’s Right to Subrogation—Is It Appropriate?](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/22/58/b79b18324e3cb8a94b5b4fb7b0d7/john-koch-767x633-1.jpg)
Waiving a Liability Insurer’s Right to Subrogation—Is It Appropriate?
![The Growing PFAS Morass: Why Insurance Should Cover These Products Liability Claims The Growing PFAS Morass: Why Insurance Should Cover These Products Liability Claims](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/86/0e/7f300d6a422db1bff9c447051b69/ellison-koss-767x633.jpg)
The Growing PFAS Morass: Why Insurance Should Cover These Products Liability Claims
9 minute read![ERISA Class Actions Surge Over Health Plans' Tobacco Surcharges ERISA Class Actions Surge Over Health Plans' Tobacco Surcharges](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/391/2024/10/Cigarettes-767x633.jpg)
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1DC Circuit Keeps Docs in Judge Newman's Misconduct Proceedings Sealed
- 2Litigators of the Week: US Soccer and MLS Fend Off Claims They Conspired to Scuttle Rival League’s Prospect
- 3Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs
- 4U.S.- China Trade War: Lawyers and Clients Left 'Relying on the Governments to Sort This Out'
- 5Willkie Adds Five-Lawyer Team From Quinn Emanuel in Germany
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250