<DOCUMENT>
<TYPE>EX-99.77E LEGAL
<SEQUENCE>3
<FILENAME>nea77e.txt
<TEXT>
Form N-SAR, Sub-Item 77E
Legal Proceedings



Nuveen Insured Tax-Free Advantage Municipal Fund

333-100320, 811-21213

During 2010, 33 Nuveen leveraged closed-end funds,
including the Nuveen Insured Tax-Free Advantage
Municipal Fund (symbol  NEA ) (hereafter, the
 Registrant ), received a demand letter from a law firm on
behalf of purported holders of common shares of each such
fund, alleging that Nuveen Asset Management, the funds
investment adviser, and the funds officers and Board of
Directors/Trustees breached their fiduciary duties related to
the redemption at par of the funds auction rate preferred
securities (ARPS). In response, the Board established an ad
hoc Demand Committee consisting of certain of its
disinterested and independent Board members to
investigate the claims. The Demand Committee retained
independent counsel to assist it in conducting an extensive
investigation. Based upon its investigation, the Demand
Committee found that it was not in the best interests of
each fund or its shareholders to take the actions suggested
in the demand letters, and recommended that the full Board
reject the demands made in the demand letters. After
reviewing the findings and recommendation of the Demand
Committee, the full Board of each fund unanimously
adopted the Demand Committees recommendation.
Subsequently, the Registrant was named as a nominal
defendant in a purported shareholder derivative complaint
filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois on July
27, 2010. The case is captioned  Safier et al. v. Nuveen
Asset Management et al., No. 10 CH 32166. The plaintiffs
are common shareholders of one or more of 20 Nuveen
funds, including the Registrant. The defendants in these
cases are Nuveen Asset Management, individual current or
former officers and an officer/director of the Nuveen funds,
Nuveen Investments, Inc. and its parent entity.  The
complaint alleges that Nuveen Asset Management and the
individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties to the
common shareholders and to the funds when they caused
the funds to redeem ARPS and that such conduct
constituted corporate waste.  The plaintiffs further allege
that Nuveen Investments, Inc. and its parent entity aided
and abetted the breaches of fiduciary duty. The complaint
seeks a declaration that the defendants have breached their
fiduciary duties, an order directing the defendants not to
redeem any ARPS at their liquidation value using fund
assets, indeterminate monetary damages in favor of the
funds and an award of plaintiffs costs and disbursements
in pursuing the action. Two related lawsuits have been
subsequently filed by the same law firm relating to
additional Nuveen funds and raising the same allegations.
These cases do not involve the Registrant.

The defendants believe the complaints are without merit
and intend to vigorously defend against the charges.


</TEXT>
</DOCUMENT>
