Mealey's Insurance Pleadings

  • August 16, 2017

    Insurer Seeks Clarification On Discovery To Reinsurer In Breach Of Contract Suit

    PHILADELPHIA — In a breach of contract suit, an insurer moved for clarification on Aug. 11 with a Pennsylvania federal court to confirm that it is to produce only unredacted versions of documents previously produced with redactions based on proprietary material, reserves and “other reinsurance” information and additional documents reflecting the date when the insurer provided first notice of asbestos claims to other reinsurers of relevant policies (R&Q Reinsurance Co. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co., No. 16-1473, E.D. Pa.).

  • August 15, 2017

    Insured: GEICO’s Brief Ignores Adverse Evidence, Violates Directed Verdict Standard

    TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Replying to an insurer’s answering brief of its initial appeal, an insured on Aug. 1 reiterated to the Florida Supreme Court that a Florida appellate court erred in reversing a state trial court’s denial of the insurer’s motion for a directed verdict in an insurance bad faith lawsuit (James M. Harvey v. GEICO General Insurance Co., No. SC17-85, Fla. Sup.).

  • August 15, 2017

    Insurer Removes Suit Seeking Coverage For Water Damages To Federal Court

    MIAMI — An insured’s suit seeking a declaration that coverage is owed for water damage to his home was removed to Florida federal court on Aug. 14 by the insurer on the basis that the amount in controversy satisfies the federal jurisdictional amount in controversy (Romeo Alcantara v. American Security Insurance Co., No. 17-23077, S.D. Fla.).

  • August 11, 2017

    Insurer Asserts No Waiver In Right To Arbitrate $1.3M Suit With Reinsurer

    MONTGOMERY, Ala. — A nonprofit public insurer argues to an Alabama federal court in an Aug. 9 brief that it did not waive its right to arbitrate its $1.3 million lawsuit under a reinsurance agreement and that a reinsurer will not be prejudiced in sending the dispute to arbitration (Alabama Municipal Insurance Corp. v. Munich Reinsurance America Inc., No. 16-cv-00948, M.D. Ala.).

  • August 9, 2017

    5th Circuit Should Reverse Ruling That Overturned Jury Verdict, Insurer Says

    NEW ORLEANS — An insurer is asking the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to reverse a district court’s judgment of law that was against a jury verdict in an insurance dispute, contending that the district court committed error because “substantial evidence supported the jury’s finding” that the insured breached the insurance policy’s cooperation condition by not providing records of its financial performance, relevant to arson that damaged the insured’s restaurant (Resie’s Chicken & Waffles Restaurant, et al. v. Acceptance Indemnity Company, et al., No. 16-20680, 5th Cir.).

  • August 8, 2017

    Surety Cannot Recover Attorney Fees, Appellant Argues To Nevada Supreme Court

    LAS VEGAS — An appellant has asked the Nevada Supreme Court to reverse a lower court’s finding that an insurer that issued a Motor Vehicles Dealer’s License Bond to an automobile dealership can recover the attorney fees that it incurred in defending an underlying claim against the bond (Zabeti vs. Great American Ins. Co., No. 70461, Nev. Sup.).

  • August 8, 2017

    Rescission Of Professional Liability Policy Was Not Warranted, Insured Argues

    HELENA, Mont. — A law firm insured and one of its attorneys have asked the Montana Supreme Court to find that a lower court erred in rescinding a professional liability insurance policy and declaring it void ab initio as to innocent insureds and innocent victims due to another insured’s failure to disclose that he stole client money (ALPS Property & Casualty Insurance Co. v. McLean & McLean, PLLP, et al., No. DA 16-0739, Mont. Sup.).

  • August 8, 2017

    Insurer Asks Texas High Court To Reverse Ruling Awarding Judgment To Couple

    AUSTIN, Texas — State Farm Lloyds told the Texas Supreme Court in a brief filed Feb. 21 that a trial court judge’s ruling awarding extracontractual damages to a couple after a jury found that they breached the terms of an insurance policy should be reversed because it is inconsistent with existing precedent (State Farm Lloyds v. Candelario Fuentes, et al., No. 16-0369, Texas Sup.).

  • August 7, 2017

    Insurers Dispute Availability Of Hospital Liability Coverage Before 2nd Circuit

    NEW YORK— Several insurers recently submitted briefs to the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, disputing whether numerous underlying lawsuits filed against a hospital in relation to alleged sexual abuse committed by one of its former medical employees implicated coverage under a Hospital Professional Liability (HPL) policy (Pacific Employers Insurance Co. v. St. Francis Care Inc., et al., 16-2747, 2nd Cir.).

  • August 7, 2017

    Parties In Real Estate Fraud Dispute Appeal No Coverage Ruling To 11th Circuit

    ATLANTA — Parties in an underlying real estate fraud dispute recently asked the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to reverse a lower federal court’s ruling that commercial general liability insurers are not liable for any amount of a $40 million consent judgment entered against the insured (Attorney’s Title Insurance Fund, et al. v. Travelers Indemnity Company of Connecticut, et al., No. 16-15386, 11th Cir.).

  • August 3, 2017

    Attorneys Urge 10th Circuit To Reverse Sanctions Ruling In Insurance Coverage Case

    DENVER — Two attorneys who were retained to represent a homeowners association in an insurance coverage dispute argue that the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals should reverse a lower court’s sanctions ruling against them pertaining to their relationship with the insurance appraiser who worked on the homeowners association claim because the award is “erroneous” (Auto-Owners Insurance Company v. Summit Park Townhome Association, No. 16-1348, 10th Cir.).

  • July 31, 2017

    Steel Maker Says Settlement With Insurer Triggered Reinsurer’s Indemnity Duties

    NEW YORK — A steel maker argues in its July 21 reply brief to a New York federal court that its settlement agreement with an insurer triggered a reinsurer’s indemnity obligations under an arbitration award because it liquidated the steel maker’s claim (National Indemnity Co. v. IRB Brasil Resseguros S.A., No. 15-3975, S.D. N.Y.).

  • July 31, 2017

    Mortgagors, Reinsurer Seek Judgment On RESPA Claim Under 3rd Circuit Law

    PITTSBURGH — In a mortgage insurance reinsurance scheme case, mortgagors and a reinsurer argue in a July 12 motion that they are entitled to judgment on a Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) claim under current Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals law (Linda Menichino, et al. v. Citibank, N.A., et al., No. 12-00058, W.D. Pa., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86380).

  • July 28, 2017

    Policyholders Seek Right To Sue For Financial Elder Abuse Under Oregon Law

    SALEM, Ore. — An insurer is not exempt from liability under Oregon state law for civil financial elder abuse, individuals who have purchased long-term care insurance policies from Bankers Life and Casualty Co. claim in a May 10 opening brief filed in the Oregon Supreme Court (Lorraine Bates, et al. v. Bankers Life and Casualty Company, et al., No. CA S064742, Ore. Sup.).

  • July 26, 2017

    Insured Appeals Ruling In Aviation Insurer’s Favor In Bad Faith Dispute

    SAN FRANCISCO — An insured has asked the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to reverse a lower federal court’s ruling in favor of an aviation insurer in a coverage dispute arising from damage to one of the insured’s tanker aircrafts (Minden Air Corporation v. Starr Indemnity & Liability Co., 16-15712, 9th Cir.).

  • July 25, 2017

    Insurer Says Trial Court Properly Dismissed Insureds’ Declaratory Judgment Claim

    LAKELAND, Fla. — An insurer argues in a May 30 brief filed in the Second District Florida Court of Appeal that a trial court’s dismissal of a declaratory judgment claim in a water damage coverage dispute was not in error because the trial court properly found that the insureds did not state a cause of action for declaratory relief (Samuel Rivera et al. v. Homeowners Choice Property and Casualty Insurance Co. Inc., No. 2D16-4567, Fla. App., 2nd Dist., 2017 FL App. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 2144).

  • July 24, 2017

    Excess Insurer Seeks Review By California High Court On Issue Of Policy Exhaustion

    LOS ANGELES — In a June 27 petition for review filed in the California Supreme Court, an excess insurer says the high court should accept review of a silica coverage suit because the appellate court failed to address what constitutes proper exhaustion of the primary insurance policy at issue (Truck Insurance Exchange v. Moldex Metric Inc., et al., No. S242845, Calif. Sup., 2017 CA S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 1064).

  • July 24, 2017

    Parties Dispute Whether Defense Costs, Settlement Were Covered Under Policy

    CHICAGO — A banking institution and an insurer that sold it a bankers professional liability (BPL) policy recently submitted their arguments before the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals over whether defense costs and a settlement reached in an underlying lawsuit were excluded under the policy (BancorpSouth Inc. v. Federal Insurance Co., No. 17-1425, 7th Cir.).

  • July 24, 2017

    Insured Says Misrepresentation Of Value Of Lost Property Was Not Material

    DETROIT — An insured’s alleged misrepresentation of the value of property that was stolen did not warrant an insurance company’s rescission of the policy, a company tells the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in seeking reversal of a federal judge in Michigan’s decision to award summary judgment to ACE American Insurance Co (AMI Stamping LLC v. ACE American Insurance Company, et al., No. 16-2341, 6th Cir.).

  • July 21, 2017

    Allstate Asks 3rd Circuit To Overturn Verdict For Insured In Collapsed Facade Suit

    PHILADELPHIA — A Pennsylvania federal jury erred when it returned a verdict in favor of an insured after the stone facade on her home collapsed because the main cause of the collapse is excluded under the homeowners policy, the insurer argues in an appellant brief filed Feb. 23 in the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Ahsaki Gordon, et al. v. Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company, No. 16-3671, 3rd Cir.).