قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Insurance / The energy company is involved in D&O disputes

The energy company is involved in D&O disputes



A Delaware court on Monday refused to dismiss board members and liability litigation filed by insurers against an energy company sued in connection with a merger.

Dallas-based Energy Transfer Equity LP, which has one of the largest portfolios of energy assets in the United States, merged with Dallas-based Regency GP LP; both were sued in June 2015 for alleged violations of Regency & # 39 ;s limited partnerships due to undisclosed conflicts of interest in the merger approval process, including, according to the Monday decision of the Delaware Superior Court in New Castle Energy Transfer Equity LP et al. v. Twin City Fire Insurance Co.

The plaintiffs in the disputes are seeking approximately $ 2 billion in damages, interest and fees, according to the judgment.

The Energy Transfers D&O insurance coverage tower, which was in effect from February 201

4 to February 2015, provided $ 170 million in Side C, unit coverage in 16 layers of insurance that exceeded $ 3.5 million self-insurance, all of which flowed from the principal insurer, Hartford Insurance Groups Twin City Fire Insurance Co., which is not a party to the lawsuit. Energy Transfer brought an action against the 17 insurance companies in November 2019, according to the decision. In January 2020, six of the defendants, ACE Insurance Co., Travelers Casualty and Surety Co., filed of America, Old Republic Insurance Co., Pinnacle National Insurance Co., RSUI Indemnity Co. and Beazley Insurance Co. Inc.

The Insured claims that the underlying dispute is a securities claim in the sense of the policy, as the underlying claims come from investors in Regency, which is a defined entity under the Twin City policy, among other claims. , the judges say.

The insurers who filed the lawsuit "claim that the insured is not fulfilling their burden to prove that there is a mature controversy for litigation that would invoke the obligation to make amends," the decision said.

The court said: “The court must … take into account the legitimate interests of the insured in a speedy settlement, the difficulty of delaying, the prospects for future development that may affect the decision ination made and the need to save scarce resources.

The Court added that it 'finds it highly unlikely that the Court will rule on damages under the policy before the insurers' rights, if any, in compensation will have matured. ", Said the decision and denied the insurers' proposals.

ACE Attorney Robert J. Katzenstein, a partner with Smith Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, Delaware, said he did not comment on ongoing disputes. Energy Transfer's lawyer did not respond to a request for comment. Catalog

Catalog


Source link