<DOCUMENT>
<TYPE>EX-99.77E LEGAL
<SEQUENCE>2
<FILENAME>nea77e.txt
<TEXT>
Form N-SAR, Sub-Item 77E
Legal Proceedings



Nuveen Insured Tax-Free Advantage Municipal Fund

811-21213

    Thirty-three Nuveen leveraged closed-end funds,
including the Nuveen Insured Tax-Free Advantage
Municipal Fund (symbol NEA) (hereafter, the Fund)
have each received a demand letter from a law firm on
behalf of purported holders of each funds common
shares. Each letter alleged that Nuveen Fund Advisors
(each funds investment adviser) and each funds officers
and Board of Directors or Trustees, as applicable (the
Board of Trustees) breached their fiduciary duties by
favoring the interests of holders of each funds auction
rate preferred shares (ARPS) over those of its common
shareholders in connection with each funds ARPS
refinancing and/or redemption activities, and demanded
that the Board take action to remedy those alleged
breaches. In response to the demand letters, each funds
Board of Trustees established a Demand Committee of
certain of its disinterested and independent members to
investigate the claims. The Demand Committee, for
each fund, retained independent counsel to assist it in
conducting its investigation. Based upon its
investigation, the Demand Committee, for each fund,
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 each
Demand Committee, the full Board of each fund
unanimously adopted the Demand Committees
recommendation and each of the thirty-three funds has
since rejected the demands made in the demand letters.

    Subsequently, all thirty-three funds that received
demand letters (including the Fund) and one fund that
did not receive a demand letter were named as nominal
defendants in four putative shareholder derivative

action complaints filed in the Circuit Court of Cook
County, Illinois, Chancery Division (the Cook County
Chancery Court). The four putative shareholder actions
have since been consolidated into one shareholder
derivative action complaint captioned Martin Safier, et
al., v. Nuveen Asset Management, et al., filed with the
Cook County Chancery Court on February 18, 2011
(the Complaint). The Complaint was filed on behalf of
purported holders of each funds common shares and
also names Nuveen Fund Advisors as a defendant,
together with current and former officers and a trustee
of each of the funds (together with the nominal
defendants, collectively, the Defendants). The
Complaint contains the same basic allegations
contained in the demand letters. The suit 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. The plaintiffs
filed a motion for preliminary injunction to stop the
funds subject to the lawsuits from redeeming additional
ARPS during the pendency of the lawsuits. The court
rejected that motion on November 23, 2010.   On April
29, 2011, each of the Defendants filed a motion to
dismiss the Complaint, which remains pending before
the court.

    Nuveen Fund Advisors believes that the
Complaint is without merit, and intends to defend
vigorously against the charges. Nuveen Fund Advisors
also believes that the Complaint will not have a
material adverse effect on the ability of Nuveen Fund
Advisors to perform its obligations under its investment
advisory contract with any of the Nuveen leveraged
closed-end funds (including the Fund).





</TEXT>
</DOCUMENT>
