Hunton Insurance Recovery Blog

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.

Law360 has appointed insurance coverage counsel Jorge R. Aviles to serve on its 2025 Editorial Board for Insurance Authority Specialty Lines. As a member on the Editorial Board, Jorge will provide feedback on publication coverage and insight on how to best shape future coverage. Jorge’s appointment to the Editorial Board reflects Hunton attorneys’ reputations as leaders in the insurance coverage field and recognizes their valuable insights and contributions to thought leadership. Law360 also appointed Hunton partner Gregory G. Hesse to serve on the Editorial Board for Bankruptcy.

Washington, DC-based partner Michael Levine has been recognized for his extensive experience and insights into emerging and legacy property and business interruption insurance coverage issues by being selected to Law360’s 2024 Editorial Advisory Board for Insurance Authority Property. As a member of the board, Mike will provide feedback on Law360’s coverage of property issues and expert insight on how best to shape future reporting of issues affecting businesses across all industry sectors.

On February 8, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion holding that a whistleblower with a retaliation claim under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”) does not need to establish that their employer acted with “retaliatory intent” to succeed on their claim. An employee must merely show that their protected whistleblowing activity was a “contributing factor” in an adverse employment action against them by their employer. Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, 144 S.Ct. 445 (2024). An employer’s retaliatory intent or lack of animosity is “irrelevant.”  Id. at 446.