Skip to main content
Home

Main navigation

  • NC Bankruptcy Cases
    • Eastern District
    • Middle District
    • Western District
  • NC Courts
    • 4th Circuit Court of Appeals
    • NC Court of Appeals
    • NC Business Court
    • NC Supreme Court Cases
  • Federal Cases
  • Law Reviews & Studies
    • Book Reviews
  • NC Legislative History
  • Student Loan Debt
User account menu
  • Log in

Breadcrumb

  1. Home
  2. Blogs

4th Cir.: Fluharty v. Philadelphia Indemnity- No Standingor Settlement Control for Trustee in D&O Policy Dispute

Profile picture for user Ed Boltz
By Ed Boltz, 18 April, 2025

Summary:

In two intertwined bankruptcy cases—one corporate (Geostellar, Inc.) and one personal (David and Monica Levine)—the respective trustees sought a declaratory judgment that they, not David Levine, controlled the right to settle claims under a $3 million wasting D&O policy issued by Philadelphia Indemnity. Their aim: to access the policy proceeds as the only meaningful source of recovery for claims that would otherwise be discharged. But both the bankruptcy court and the district court found the trustees lacked standing

The Court of Appeals affirmed,  holding that  the Geostellar Trustee lacked standing because the policy did not provide first-party coverage to the debtor-corporation—only to individual directors and officers. And under West Virginia law, third-party plaintiffs cannot sue an insurer unless coverage is denied or a judgment is unpaid—neither of which applied.  

The Levine Trustee lacked standing because any personal liability of Levine had already been discharged. As such, the estate had no economic interest in the outcome of the adversary action or in the right to settle the claim.

Section 541(a)(1) did not help either trustee, because the proceeds of the D&O policy were not estate property. Courts have consistently held that when a policy offers only direct coverage to directors and officers (rather than indemnity to the debtor entity), the proceeds belong to the insured individual—not the estate.

Implications for Consumer Bankruptcy and Debtor Protections
While primarily a corporate insurance case, In re Levine carries several important implications for individual consumer debtors and Chapter 7 and 13 trustees:

Commentary:

North Carolina is even more restrictive on the rights of third-party plaintiffs  than West Virginia appears to be, which have led to involuntary bankruptcies being filed in order that a Trustee can assert this sort of claim against automobile insurers for the eventual benefit of third-party plaintiffs as creditors.  See In re Carter.

With proper attribution,  please share this post. 

To read a copy of the transcript, please see:

Blog comments

Attachment
Document
fluharty_v._philadelphia_indemnity.pdf (145.17 KB)
Category
4th Circuit Court of Appeals

About Us

Mountain View The purpose of the NC Bankruptcy Expert blog is to provide legal professionals with a consolidated resource for updates and case summaries about issues and decisions affecting bankruptcy, foreclosures, mortgages, and debt collection.

 
Lawyer Edward Boltz | Top Attorney Chapter 7

NC Bankruptcy Expert FREE Consultation

We Offer A Free Bankruptcy Consultation which has helped over 70,000 North Carolina families. We serve the entire state of North Carolina.

Proud Member of:












Categories

  • 4th Circuit Court of Appeals
  • Book Reviews
  • District Courts
  • Eastern District
  • Ed Boltz: Bankruptcy Attorney
  • Federal Cases
  • Forms
  • Home
  • Law Reviews & Studies
  • Middle District
  • Mortgage Modification Mediation Documents
  • NC Business Court
  • NC Court of Appeals
  • NC Courts
  • NC Supreme Court Cases
  • News
  • North Carolina Bankruptcy Cases
  • North Carolina District Court Cases
  • North Carolina Exemptions Legislative History
  • Student Loan Debt
  • Student Loan Options and Chapter 13 Bankruptcy
  • Western District
RSS feed
v. 1.2.2, © 2013-2025 ncbankruptcyexpert.com, all rights reserved. Follow @edboltz