Evan Bolla Examines Narrowing of D&O Coverage Exclusions by Delaware Courts for New York Law Journal

June 9, 2026

Delaware courts are requiring insurers to more precisely justify denials of directors and officers (D&O) coverage in merger, acquisition and de-SPAC transactions more frequently. Harris St. Laurent LLP partner Evan Bolla explores this trend in a New York Law Journal article titled “Reining in Transactional Exclusions: Delaware Courts Narrow D&O Coverage Bars and Raise the Burden on Insurers.”

In the article, Bolla analyzes two Delaware decisions, Illinois National Insurance Co. v. Harman International Industries, Inc. and View Operating Corporation v. StarStone Specialty Insurance Co. He examines how courts are requiring insurers to establish a direct connection between exclusionary policy language and the specific claims, losses or settlements at issue. Bolla also discusses the courts’ growing reluctance to accept broad insurer arguments based on generalized “economic reality” theories untethered from the actual policy text.

According to Bolla, the decisions reinforce longstanding Delaware insurance law principles requiring that exclusions be narrowly construed and carefully proven. The rulings also carry important implications for modern merger, acquisition and de-SPAC litigation, where insurers often attempt to deny D&O coverage through expansive readings of transaction-related exclusions.

“The message from Delaware appears increasingly clear,” Bolla writes. “Transactional context alone is not enough. If insurers intend to rely on exclusions to deny D&O coverage, they must prove that the exclusion they drafted precisely fits the claim and loss before the court.”

Read the full article here.

Bolla leads Harris St. Laurent’s Insurance Recovery, Advancement and Indemnification practice.