Raychem Corp. v. Federal Insurance

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that defense costs are covered by D & 0 policies if they are “reasonably related” to the defense of the insured officers and directors even if the costs incurred may have also benefitted the defense of the uninsured corporate entity
• rejecting reliance on Slottow in the context of allocation between corporate and D & O liability
• rejecting rebanee on Slot-tow in the context of allocation between corporate and D & O liability
• interpreting Olson as involving suits brought for the sole purpose of protecting shareholder interests
• “Having 17 purchased this form of insurance, the [insured] is entitled to the full benefit of its bargain. 18 So long as an item of service or expense is reasonably related to the defense of a covered 19 claim, it may be apportioned wholly to the covered claim.”
• “[T]he insurer bears the burden at trial of proving that a statutory or policy 1 exclusion or limitation applies.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).