• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

McCarter & English Logo

  • People
  • Services
  • Insights
  • Our Firm
    • Leadership Team
    • Social Justice
    • Diversity, Equity & Inclusion
    • Pro Bono
    • Client Service Values
    • Alumni
  • Join Us
    • Lawyers
    • Summer Associates
    • Patent Professionals
    • Professional Staff
    • Job Openings
  • Locations
    • Boston
    • Philadelphia
    • East Brunswick
    • Indianapolis
    • Stamford
    • Hartford
    • Trenton
    • Miami
    • Washington, DC
    • New York
    • Wilmington
    • Newark
  • Share

Share

Browse Alphabetically:

  • A
  • B
  • C
  • D
  • E
  • F
  • G
  • H
  • I
  • J
  • K
  • L
  • M
  • N
  • O
  • P
  • Q
  • R
  • S
  • T
  • U
  • V
  • W
  • X
  • Y
  • Z
  • All
Bankruptcy, Restructuring & Litigation
Blockchain, Smart Contracts & Digital Currencies
Business Litigation
Cannabis
Coronavirus Resource Center
Corporate
Crisis Management
Cybersecurity & Data Privacy
Delaware Corporate, LLC & Partnership Law
Design, Fashion & Luxury
E-Discovery & Records Management
Energy & Utilities
Environment & Energy
Financial Institutions
Food & Beverage
Government Affairs
Government Contracts & Global Trade
Government Investigations & White Collar Defense
Healthcare
Hospitality
Immigration
Impact Investing
Insurance Recovery, Litigation & Counseling
Intellectual Property
Labor & Employment
Life Sciences
Manufacturing
Products Liability, Mass Torts & Consumer Class Actions
Public Finance
Real Estate
Renewable Energy
Sports & Entertainment
Tax & Employee Benefits
Technology Transactions
Transportation, Logistics & Supply Chain Management
Trusts, Estates & Private Clients
Venture Capital & Emerging Growth Companies
  • Broadcasts
  • Events
  • News
  • Publications
  • View All Insights
Search By:
Insights Publication Magazine Corner
Main image for The Opioid Crisis: Litigation Comes for Corporate Officers and Directors
Publications|Alert

The Opioid Crisis: Litigation Comes for Corporate Officers and Directors

Insurance Recovery, Litigation & Counseling Alert

2.15.2018

Litigation related to the opioid crisis is on the rise, and now corporate shareholders are entering the fray. In recent months, shareholders have brought a number of lawsuits against opioid manufacturers and distributors, as well as their directors and officers. These shareholder suits open a new front in opioid litigation, joining dozens of already pending cases brought by states, counties, and municipalities against manufacturers and distributors. As opioid litigation expands in new directions and subjects companies and their executives to financial risk and expense, now is the time for entities and individuals to review their insurance coverage and shore up their protection.

In 2012, the state of West Virginia sued certain opioid distributors, alleging violation of consumer protection laws. Since then, states, counties, and municipalities have brought a growing wave of lawsuits seeking to recover from manufacturers and distributors the steep costs of responding to the opioid crisis. Allegations range from varying forms of negligence, to violation of consumer protection statutes, to violation of the False Claims Act. Manufacturers and distributors have understandably called on their general liability insurance carriers to share the burden of defending these suits. But at least some insurers pushed back, and opioid-related insurance coverage disputes have begun to wend their way through the courts, with some conflicting results. One court, for example, concluded that West Virginia’s lawsuit asserted claims “because of bodily injury” – requiring the insurer to provide coverage – while another reached the opposite conclusion.

With coverage under general liability policies still relatively untested for these exposures, the recent spate of securities suits undoubtedly will present new issues under a different set of insurance contracts: Directors and Officers (D&O) policies. Some of the recent suits allege that officers and directors of opioid distributors failed to monitor the size and frequency of shipments and report aberrations to the Drug Enforcement Administration, resulting in civil fines or other liabilities. Other suits claim that the defendant companies, and certain officers and directors, made materially false public statements regarding the company’s opioid practices, resulting in drops in share price when misstatements were corrected or drugs were withdrawn from the market in response to FDA pressure.

D&O policies are intended to protect directors, officers, and often the company itself against allegations of wrongful conduct, including claims grounded in breach of duties, neglect, error, misstatements, misleading statements, and other omissions or acts. D&O insurers often attempt to defeat or limit their coverage obligations by citing policy provisions such as:

  • Bodily injury exclusions: which may preclude coverage for loss arising from certain bodily injury-related claims.
  • Conduct exclusions: which may exclude coverage for loss relating to certain types of conduct, such as fraudulent or criminal misconduct, or illegal profits or remuneration. Fortunately, proactive policyholders can place conditions on this exclusion so that it is triggered only when the conduct in question has been “adjudicated” by the court in the context of the underlying claim.
  • Imputation of knowledge provisions: which address when one director’s or officer’s conduct – such as excluded fraudulent conduct – may be attributed to another director or officer, or to the insured entity.
  • Related claims/interrelated wrongful acts provisions: which may treat certain “related” or “interrelated” acts or events as a single claim. Insurers frequently cite these provisions to attempt to push claims out of their policy period, reduce the limits available, or dispute the policyholder’s timely notice.

Although many D&O policies contain provisions falling under the broad umbrellas identified above, even small differences in policy language can be critical. For that reason, it is essential for corporate policyholders to act now. Any entity that may be impacted by an opioid-related suit should immediately review its D&O policies to understand the coverage it has – and take steps to secure the coverage it needs. McCarter & English’s Insurance Coverage team has extensive experience in reviewing, negotiating, and improving D&O insurance policies. We can undertake a privileged and confidential review of your insurance program’s coverage, and facilitate underwriting discussions with brokers and insurers to improve your D&O policies. If your company is concerned about potential opioid liabilities, we are here to help.

sidebar

pdfemail

Related People

Gregory H. Horowitz
Joann M. Lytle
Sherilyn Pastor
Adam Budesheim
J. Wylie Donald
Thomas W. Ladd
Steven H. Weisman

Related Services

Insurance Recovery, Litigation & Counseling
Subscribe to our Insights
McCarter & English, LLP
Copyright © 2023 McCarter & English, LLP. All Rights Reserved.
  • Login
  • Attorney Advertising
  • Privacy
  • Awards Methodology
  • Contact
  • Subscribe
  • Sitemap

The McCarter & English, LLP website is for informational purposes only. We do not provide legal advice on this website. We can provide legal advice only to our clients in specific inquiries that they address to us. If you are interested in becoming a client, please contact us, but do not send any information about your specific legal question. We cannot serve as your lawyers until we establish an attorney-client relationship, which can occur only after we follow procedures within our firm and after we agree to the terms of the representation.

Accept Cancel