You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Goggin v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA

Citation: Not availableDocket: N17C-10-083 PRW CCLD

Court: Superior Court of Delaware; November 29, 2018; Delaware; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves a dispute over the applicability of a Directors and Officers (D&O) insurance policy exclusionary clause. Plaintiffs, who served as directors of a bankrupt corporation, sought coverage from the insurer, National Union Fire Insurance Company, for defense costs and claims related to alleged breaches of fiduciary duties. National Union denied coverage based on an exclusion that precludes claims arising from actions taken in any capacity other than as a director or officer. The plaintiffs argued that the exclusion did not apply since their actions were within their directorial capacities, despite also being involved with other investment entities. The court applied Delaware law, specifically the 'but-for' test, to assess whether the claims originated from the plaintiffs’ roles as directors. Ultimately, the court determined that the claims resulted principally from the plaintiffs’ actions associated with the investment entities, thereby triggering the exclusion and denying the plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the pleadings. Consequently, National Union was not obligated to provide coverage under the D&O policy for these claims, solidifying the exclusion’s applicability to the case at hand.

Legal Issues Addressed

Delaware's 'But-For' Test in Exclusionary Clauses

Application: The court utilized the 'but-for' test to determine if the claims would exist independently of the directors' involvement with ECM Entities.

Reasoning: The Court concludes that these Trustee Claims would not exist 'but for' Goggin and Goodwin’s actions related to ECM, which are central to the claims made.

Directors and Officers Insurance Coverage

Application: The court examined whether the D&O insurance policy covered the directors' defense costs and claims under the exclusionary clause related to the capacity in which the directors acted.

Reasoning: Goggin and Goodwin sought coverage from National Union, which denied their claim based on an exclusionary clause in the policy.

Exclusionary Clauses in Insurance Policies

Application: The court evaluated the applicability of an exclusionary clause within the D&O Policy, which National Union asserted precluded coverage for actions not directly arising from the directors' roles.

Reasoning: National Union, which was approached for defense coverage, acknowledged it would cover certain claims but denied overall coverage based on Exclusion 4(g) of the D&O Policy.

Interpretation of 'Arising Out Of' in Insurance Context

Application: The court applied Delaware law to interpret the phrase 'arising out of' broadly, assessing whether the claims originated from the directors' roles.

Reasoning: The term 'arising out of' is broadly construed, meaning it originates from or connects with an individual’s actions, and is interpreted to be broader than 'caused by.'