In its brief, UP weighs in on whether this appeal generally concerns the Appellant’s entitlement to coverage under a directors and officers policy of insurance for consolidated shareholder appraisal actions resulting in a judgment against the Appellant, as well as litigation costs and fees. UP identifies important issues of insurance policy interpretation and jurisprudence that arose from the lower court’s ruling that denied coverage provided by Jarden’s director’s and officer’s liability insurance policies for losses resulting from four consolidated securities price appraisal lawsuits filed by stockholders against Jarden. The arguments to support UP’s conclusion are as follows:
I. The Superior Court Failed to Properly Interpret the D&O Policy Language and Therefore Issued a Decision that the Insurance Industry Will Use a Precluding Coverage For Appraisal Actions as a Matter of Public Policy
II. The Appraisal Action Arose From a Series of “Interrelated Wrongful Acts” and is Therefore a Covered Claim