Ordinarily, a major insurer would not issue a D&O policy except as part of a package including a General Liability policy, one of the reasons being to avoid spats with other insurers about which of the two forms a loss falls under. The former would generally be "claims-made" and the latter "occurrence" based. The underwriters endeavor to eliminate overlapping coverage between the two forms. One way this is done is to remove coverage for "bodily injury" from the D&O form, and limit coverage to "bodily injury and property damage" under the GL form. Coverage for this event would be provided, in the first instance, by the prior "occurrence" based GL policy. It is far more likely than not that the prior coverage was also issued by Travelers. What Crump would like to do, obviously, is "stack" the policy limits of the D&O and GL forms to double the potential recovery. This "Dec Action" does not necessarily mean that Travelers will not aggressively defend the suit, when it is filed.