What distinguishes Directors and Officers (D&O) claims handling from general liability claims?

• A. D&O and GL are identical in coverage and defense strategies.
• B. D&O covers wrongful acts by directors or officers; governance, securities provisions, and corporate policy features shape defense and settlements differently than GL.
• C. D&O cannot be insured.
• D. D&O only covers property damage.

Answer: (B)

The key idea is that D&O claims handling is about allegations of wrongful acts by directors and officers in their corporate roles, and these acts are shaped by governance, fiduciary duties, and securities-related issues. Because the claims target leadership decisions, the defense and settlement approach must account for corporate governance dynamics, potential conflicts of interest, indemnification and advancement of defense costs, and regulatory or investor actions stemming from those decisions. General liability, by contrast, covers typical business liability like bodily injury, property damage, or advertising injuries arising from operating activities, not the personal acts or governance decisions of directors and officers. Therefore, the coverage and defense strategy for D&O differ from GL because D&O revolves around management liability, securities and governance matters, and policy features that govern how settlements are handled, while GL deals with ordinary liability arising from the business’s operations.