Joshua Gold was recently quoted September 24 in a Law 360 article entitled, “Insurers Exert Control Over Cyber Defense Counsel Choice” where he provides some insight as the reasoning behind insurers' exertion of control over cyber defense counsel choice.
Insurers are likely including control of litigation as a way to "cut claim expenses wherever and whenever they can" in the tightening cyber market, said Joshua Gold, shareholder in the New York office of Anderson Kill.
"I see a lot of defense-related cyber policy clauses that give the policyholder an option from a panel of firms," he said. "I think this is just emblematic of the fact that we're seeing a tightening in the cyberinsurance market."
This can lead to a conflict of interest, policyholder attorneys say. Particularly if the insurer provides the policyholder defense under a reservation of rights and later determines no coverage exists, thereby ending the defense and "pulling the rug out from under the policyholder," said Gold, who represents policyholders.
Although disputes between policyholders and carriers over defense representation have rarely been litigated, Gold of Anderson Kill foresees that changing soon.
"Given the environment we're in, I do anticipate there will be bigger and more public fights over control of defense, and control of the selection of computer forensic firms."
Read the full Law 360 article here.