Hunton Insurance Recovery Blog

Colleges and universities have long sat at the crossroads of freedom of expression and societal change. As campus activism surges, they face growing pressure to protect their institutional missions while upholding students’ individual rights in an era of heightened scrutiny.

In Illinois National Insurance Company v. Harman International Industries Incorporated, No. N22C-05-098 (Del. 2026), the Delaware Supreme Court affirmed D&O coverage for a $28 million settlement of a securities class action, finding the policies’ “bump-up” exclusion inapplicable to the settlement.

In a recent legal update, Hunton attorneys Steven Haas, Johnathon E. Schronce, Geoffrey B. Fehling, and Madalyn Moore discuss important takeaways from the Harman decision for policyholders who find themselves embroiled in M&A litigation. The decision underscores the continued relevance of bump-up exclusions, how those exclusions can lead to coverage disputes involving M&A litigation, and the importance of policyholders’ awareness of potential bump-up coverage issues when placing or renewing D&O coverage, pursuing transactions, and defending and settling deal-related claims.

If recent years have taught insurance practitioners anything, it is that the most consequential coverage disputes rarely turn on novelty alone. In 2025, courts continued to resolve high‑stakes insurance disputes by returning to first principles—examining when claims are related, how losses and occurrences are defined and aggregated, and how policy language allocates risk across time and conduct. D&O coverage and other core insurance law issues again occupied center stage, while decisions in property, cyber, and liability disputes reinforced a familiar theme: policy interpretation remains the decisive factor in determining whether coverage is available in an increasingly complex claims environment. As the decisions discussed below demonstrate, 2025 confirmed that even as risks evolve, coverage disputes remain grounded in careful, policy‑specific analysis.

Directors and officers liability insurance is first and foremost protection against personal exposure of boards and management who are targeted in claims challenging their decisions in running the company. That’s why it is surprising how often dedicated “Side A” coverage—insurance coverage, subject to no self-insured retention, available exclusively for the benefit of directors and officers who are not indemnified by the company—is overlooked in placing and renewing D&O insurance programs. One recent Texas bankruptcy ruling, In re First Brands Group, LLC, No. 25-90399 (CML) (Bankr. S.D. Tex. Jan. 7, 2026), demonstrates just how powerful Side A protection can be. There, against strong objections from the creditors’ committee, the bankruptcy court granted motions by numerous former executives seeking relief from the automatic stay to recover D&O insurance proceeds, unlocking millions in Side A coverage to defend against private and governmental claims asserted in connection with the bankruptcy.