Indian Harbor Insurance Co. v. Zucker

July 13, 2017
Case Type:
Business
Case Status:
Affirmed
Citation:
16-1695/1697/1698 (6th Circuit, Jun 20,2017) Published
Ruling:
'Insured vs. Insured' exclusion in D&O insurance policy bars claims by a liquidating trustee against directors and officers of the company because such claims are brought by, on behalf of, or in the right of the company.
Procedural context:
Appeal from the final decision of the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids.
Facts:
Capitol Bancorp, a bank holding company, filed a chapter 11 petition in 2012. Prior to the bankruptcy and until plan confirmation, members of the Reid family served as the company's directors and officers. The company purchased a standard directors & officers insurance policy prior to the bankruptcy and extended that policy during the bankruptcy. A plan was eventually confirmed which limited the liability of the directors and officers for breach of fiduciary duty to pre-petition acts and limited recovery on such claims to the insurance policy. The claims themselves were assigned to a liquidating trust. The liquidating trust filed a lawsuit against the directors and officers and the insurance company filed a separate suit in federal court seeking a declaratory judgment that the policy's 'insured vs. insured' exclusion barred coverage.
Judge(s):
Sutton, Daughtrey, and Donald (dissenting)
Tag(s):
 
 
Summary by:      Daniel Waxman (Wyatt, Tarrant & Combs, LLP)

Volo, an exclusive ABI Member product, offers bankruptcy circuit case summaries within 24 hours. Case alerts can be filtered by circuit, case, or key word. Find out more at volo.abi.org.

Previous Article
Zutrau v. Zutrau (In re Zutrau)
Zutrau v. Zutrau (In re Zutrau)

A 1st Circuit ruling held that certain debts owed to the Debtor's sister were nondischargable under section...

Next Article
Davis v. Belloc (In re Regional Care Services Corp.)
Davis v. Belloc (In re Regional Care Services Corp.)

9th Circuit BAP affirmed order of the bankruptcy court denying reconsideration under FRCP 59(e) of its allo...