Directors and officers (D&O) liability insurance is one of the most important risk management tools available to corporate directors, officers, and the businesses they lead. It provides financial protection against claims alleging that directors or officers have committed wrongful acts in their corporate capacities — claims that can include securities class actions, shareholder derivative suits, regulatory investigations, breach of fiduciary duty litigation, employment practices claims in the management liability context, and a wide range of other civil and criminal proceedings. For most directors and senior officers at US companies, D&O coverage is not optional: it is a fundamental condition of their willingness to serve. Without adequate D&O coverage, attracting and retaining qualified board members and executive talent would be significantly more difficult and expensive.

Despite its importance, D&O insurance is widely misunderstood — by the very directors and officers whose protection depends on it. Directors frequently assume that D&O policies provide broader coverage than they actually do, that the policy they have seen summarized in a board presentation is the same as the policy the company actually purchased, or that coverage questions will be resolved in their favor in the event of a claim. These assumptions are dangerous. D&O policies are complex, heavily conditioned, and riddled with exclusions that can eliminate or substantially limit coverage at precisely the moment it is most needed. Every director and officer should have a working understanding of how D&O coverage works, what it covers, what it does not cover, and how to assess whether the company’s program provides the protection it is supposed to provide.

The Three Sides of a D&O Program

D&O liability insurance is typically structured around three distinct coverage parts, commonly referred to as Side A, Side B, and Side C. Each part addresses a different coverage scenario, and together they form a comprehensive program designed to protect both the individuals and the company across a range of claim situations.

Side A coverage, also called ‘individual coverage,’ directly insures directors and officers for claims where the company is unable or unwilling to indemnify them. Indemnification may be unavailable because the company is insolvent or in bankruptcy, because applicable law prohibits indemnification in the specific circumstances (for example, in derivative actions in certain jurisdictions), or because the company has determined that indemnification is not required under the circumstances. Side A coverage is the most critical part of the D&O program from the perspective of individual directors and officers, because it provides protection when they are most vulnerable — when the corporate safety net of indemnification is unavailable. Some companies purchase dedicated Side A policies that provide additional limits exclusively for individual directors and officers, on top of the main D&O tower, to ensure that individual protection is not depleted by corporate claims.

Side B coverage, also called ‘corporate reimbursement coverage,’ reimburses the company for amounts it pays to indemnify its directors and officers. Where the company has paid defense costs or a judgment or settlement on behalf of a director or officer, Side B coverage reimburses the company for those payments, subject to a retention (deductible) that varies by policy and by company size and risk profile. Side B coverage is the most frequently triggered part of a standard D&O policy, because the vast majority of D&O claims are handled through corporate indemnification rather than direct individual insurer payment.

Side C coverage, also called ‘entity coverage,’ insures the corporate entity itself against securities claims — specifically, claims brought by shareholders alleging violations of securities laws. For public companies, Side C typically covers securities class action claims against both the company and its directors and officers arising from alleged material misstatements or omissions in the company’s public disclosures. Side C coverage is valuable for the company but can create tension with individual directors and officers in the claims context, because Side B and Side C coverage share the same policy limits. In a major securities class action where both the company and the individual directors and officers are named defendants, the combined claim can deplete policy limits that might otherwise be available entirely for the individuals’ protection.

Who Is Insured

D&O policies typically define the insured persons as all past, present, and future directors and officers of the company and its subsidiaries. Most modern policies also extend coverage to employees in certain circumstances — particularly where they are named as co-defendants with directors and officers or where they are considered functional officers. Some policies extend coverage to outside directors serving on subsidiary boards, advisory boards, or the boards of nonprofit organizations at the company’s direction. The precise scope of the insured person definition must be reviewed carefully for any company whose governance structure includes non-traditional board arrangements, such as board observer seats, informal advisory councils, or officers who do not have that title but exercise equivalent authority.

Subsidiary coverage is an area that frequently surprises companies at the time of a claim. Most D&O policies cover subsidiaries but may define ‘subsidiary’ in a way that excludes certain entities — for example, entities in which the company owns less than a majority interest, foreign subsidiaries, or entities acquired during the policy period but not reported to the insurer. Companies that operate through complex subsidiary structures, joint ventures, or partially owned entities should review their D&O policy’s subsidiary definition carefully and request endorsements to expand coverage where necessary. The time to discover that an entity is not covered is before a claim arises, not after.

What Is Covered: The Wrongful Act

D&O policies cover claims arising from a ‘wrongful act’ committed by an insured person in their capacity as a director or officer. The definition of wrongful act varies across policies but typically encompasses any actual or alleged error, misstatement, misleading statement, act, omission, neglect, or breach of duty committed or attempted by an insured person in their insured capacity. This is a broad definition that encompasses most of the claims that directors and officers face: breach of fiduciary duty, securities fraud, misrepresentation in public disclosures, wrongful termination of employees in the management liability context, regulatory violations, and similar claims.

The requirement that the wrongful act be committed in an ‘insured capacity’ is important. Actions taken by a director or officer in a personal capacity — outside of their role as a director or officer of the insured company — are not covered. A CEO who makes a fraudulent misrepresentation in a personal real estate transaction is not acting in an insured capacity. A director who discriminates against an employee in a personal business transaction is not acting in an insured capacity. The insured capacity requirement means that D&O coverage is tied to the governance role, not to the individual.

Key Exclusions

D&O policies contain a variety of exclusions that limit or eliminate coverage in specified circumstances. Understanding these exclusions is essential to assessing the real protective value of any D&O program. The most significant exclusions include the following.

The fraud and intentional misconduct exclusion eliminates coverage for claims arising from the insured’s deliberate fraud, deliberate dishonesty, or willful violation of law. Most policies include an ‘adjudication’ or ‘final adjudication’ carve-back, which means the exclusion does not apply unless there has been a final, non-appealable court determination that the insured engaged in fraud or deliberate dishonesty. This carve-back is critically important: it means that the insurer must fund the defense of the individual even in cases where fraud is alleged, and may only cut off coverage if the fraud allegation is ultimately proven to a final judgment. Policies that use a lower trigger — such as an allegation of fraud, or a preliminary finding — provide significantly weaker protection for individual directors and officers and should be avoided.

The insured versus insured exclusion eliminates coverage for claims brought by one insured against another insured. Its original purpose was to prevent collusive claims — for example, a company suing its own officers to access D&O coverage for losses that were not truly covered claims. In practice, however, the exclusion can eliminate coverage for legitimate claims, such as a shareholder derivative suit in which the corporation (an insured) is technically the plaintiff suing its former officers (also insureds), or employment claims brought by officers against the company. Most well-negotiated D&O policies include carve-backs that restore coverage for shareholder derivative claims, claims by employees alleging employment practices violations, and claims by former directors or officers, among others. The breadth of these carve-backs is one of the most important negotiating points in D&O placement.

The conduct exclusion (sometimes called the personal profit or improper benefit exclusion) eliminates coverage for claims arising from the insured’s having gained personal profit, remuneration, or advantage to which they were not legally entitled. Like the fraud exclusion, this exclusion should be subject to a final adjudication trigger. The prior and pending litigation exclusion eliminates coverage for claims arising out of litigation or proceedings that were pending against the insured prior to the policy’s inception date. The pollution exclusion, while more commonly associated with environmental liability policies, appears in some D&O policies in a broad form that can unexpectedly eliminate coverage for environmental enforcement actions. Companies with significant environmental exposure should review their D&O policy’s pollution exclusion carefully.

Policy Limits, Towers, and Program Structure

The adequacy of D&O coverage depends not only on the terms of the policy but on the amount of coverage purchased. D&O coverage is typically purchased in a layered structure called a tower. The primary policy sits at the bottom of the tower and provides the first dollars of coverage; excess policies sit above the primary layer and provide additional limits once the primary layer is exhausted. The total limit of the tower is the aggregate coverage available for any single policy year. Tower structures allow companies to purchase very large total limits — often tens of millions to hundreds of millions of dollars for major public companies — by spreading the risk across multiple insurers.

Determining the right amount of D&O coverage requires an assessment of the company’s specific risk profile. Key factors include: the company’s size (larger companies face larger securities class actions and regulatory proceedings); the industry (financial services, healthcare, and technology companies face heightened regulatory and litigation risk); the company’s governance profile (companies with governance weaknesses face greater D&O exposure); the history of shareholder litigation in the company’s industry; recent settlements and verdicts in comparable cases; and the adequacy of the company’s indemnification obligations. Insurance brokers provide benchmarking data comparing the company’s program to peers, and that data should be reviewed at each annual renewal.

Evaluating Your D&O Program

Every board should periodically review the adequacy of the company’s D&O program. The review should address: whether the coverage parts (Sides A, B, and C) are appropriate for the company’s structure and risk profile; whether the definition of insured persons covers all directors, officers, and other individuals who should be protected; whether the subsidiary definition covers all entities through which the company operates; whether the key exclusions contain the appropriate carve-backs; whether the policy limits are adequate given the company’s risk profile and industry benchmarks; whether there is a dedicated Side A policy in addition to the main tower; and whether the insolvency exclusion has been properly addressed (some policies exclude coverage for claims that arise after the company enters bankruptcy, which is precisely when individuals most need protection).

The renewal process is also an opportunity to assess whether the insurers providing coverage are financially strong and have demonstrated a track record of paying D&O claims fairly. A policy from an insurer with a history of aggressive coverage disputes, creative exclusion arguments, or financial weakness provides far less real protection than its face value suggests. D&O coverage questions are among the most complex in the insurance market, and companies benefit significantly from working with experienced coverage counsel — separate from the company’s general outside counsel — to evaluate their programs and to identify gaps before claims arise.

See Also