WASHINGTON, D.C. — Challenging several of a lower court’s rulings in a dispute over a $26 million award before the District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, a financial services company argues in its Sept. 3 appellant brief that some of its claims against reinsurers and reinsurance brokers should not have been dismissed and that summary judgment should not have been granted against it.
RICHMOND, Va. — A federal court in South Carolina correctly rejected an insurer’s claims against a bank in a dispute over a reinsurance trust for an insolvent insurer, the bank argues in its Aug. 31 appellee brief before the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.
TRENTON, N.J. — Following a New Jersey federal magistrate judge’s request for an update on the case, parties in a dispute over indemnification for asbestos bodily injury claims on Sept. 14 filed a stipulation and order to extend the deadline for insurers to respond to reinsurers’ second set of requests for production of documents to Oct. 4.
NEW YORK — Days after removing a reinsurer’s suit seeking a declaratory judgment over defense and indemnity costs in an underlying personal injury lawsuit to a federal court in New York, an insurer on Sept. 10 filed an answer asserting 26 affirmative defenses, including that the issues are not yet ripe and that the insure has at all relevant times “articulated valid bases for its coverage position.”
CHICAGO — An independent fiduciary on Aug. 10 filed an opposition to insurance brokers’ motion for a federal court in Illinois to bifurcate discovery in a lawsuit alleging that they breached their duty of care because they knew or should have known that a multiple employer welfare arrangement (MEWA) was not in compliance with its structural requirements and was not financially sound.
CINCINNATI — In recent supplemental briefs filed at the request of a Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel following oral arguments, parties in an asbestos coverage dispute argue whether the court should abstain from deciding the case during the pendency of the liquidation proceedings against the appellant, OneBeacon Insurance Co.
PASADENA, Calif. — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Sept. 7 affirmed a lower federal court’s summary judgment ruling in favor of an insurance agent in an insured’s lawsuit alleging professional negligence, finding that the professional negligence and negligent misrepresentation claims fail because the insured has failed to establish an essential element duty.
MIAMI — Citing a putative third-party defendant’s invocation of an English court’s antisuit injunction, plaintiffs in a plane crash lawsuit have filed notice in a Florida court that they canceled a hearing on their longstanding motion for leave to file a third-party complaint against an insurer, reinsurer and insurance broker regarding settlements reached over an $844 million default judgment.
SOUTH BEND, Ind. — A property owner on Sept. 1 asked a federal court in Indiana to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction an insurer’s declaratory judgment complaint against its contractor, arguing that a ruling would involve a determination of an ultimate issue in the underlying state court lawsuit in which it alleges that the contractor’s negligence during demolition caused a wall to collapse.
WILLIAMSPORT, Pa. — Class certification is appropriate in a disability benefits dispute over a disability insurer’s right to reimbursement following a claimant recovery of damages from a tortfeasor in an auto accident because the insurer engaged in a common course of conduct in seeking reimbursement from insureds, a disability claimant says in an Aug. 30 brief in support of her motion for class certification.
PHOENIX — A commercial general liability insurer’s declaratory judgment action against its insured contractor should be dismissed because the insurer failed to join a necessary party — the contractor whose claims against the insured prompted the coverage action, the insured contractor tells a federal court in Arizona in an Aug. 27 motion to dismiss.
ALBANY, N.Y. — A jury’s $10,901,005 judgment in an insurer’s favor was proper and each of a reinsurer’s contrary arguments “is mistaken,” the insurer told a federal judge in New York on Aug. 26 in a dispute over defense costs paid for asbestos liabilities, filing opposition to a reinsurer’s motions to stay and to amend the judgment or to hold a new trial.
SAN FRANCISCO — A disability claimant on Aug. 13 filed suit in California federal court against a group disability insurer and an individual disability income insurer, alleging that the insurers breached their contracts and acted in bad faith in terminating the claimant’s disability benefits.
NEW YORK — A federal magistrate judge in New York erred in finding that that an insurer has a duty defend property and project management service companies sued by a condominium board after the glass panels on balconies started falling and shattering because “there is simply no question” that the companies “are alleged to have engaged in strictly intentional conduct,” which is not covered under the insurance policy, an insurer says in an Aug. 25 brief.
NEW YORK — Seeking reversal of an asbestos billing judgment in an excess insurer’s favor that was based on a ruling that an exhaustion requirement was ambiguous, a reinsurer says in its Aug. 19 appellant brief before the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that the insurer has successfully argued in separate proceedings that the same language is unambiguous; the reinsurer also says the insurer should be judicially estopped from arguing that the language is ambiguous.
PASADENA, Calif. — Allegations that they violated constitutional rights and acted in bad faith by filing a conservatorship against a workers’ compensation insurer were properly dismissed under the prior exclusive jurisdiction doctrine, the California insurance commissioner and his deputies tell the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in their Aug. 25 appellees’ brief, arguing that a federal judge in California correctly considered the gravamen of the action; they also urge affirmation of the judge’s alternative finding that abstention under Younger v. Harris applies.
SAN FRANCISCO — Neither the prior exclusive jurisdiction rule nor abstention under Younger v. Harris applies to allegations that state regulators abused their authority in obtaining a conservatorship against a workers’ compensation insurance carrier, the insurer’s successor in interest argues in an Aug. 16 appellant brief before the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, seeking reversal and remand following a trial court’s dismissal of the case.
NEWARK, N.J. — In an Aug. 17 answer to a first amended complaint in a personal injury lawsuit in which New Jersey Property-Liability Insurance Guaranty Association (NJPLIGA) filed a cross-claim seeking contribution from the other defendants for damages caused by a police car chase that led to a collision, two co-defendants “deny each and every allegation asserted” by NJPLIGA.
BOSTON — The Puerto Rico insurance commissioner and auxiliary rehabilitator on Aug. 18 informed the First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that proceedings filed by the commonwealth of Puerto Rico under Title III of the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA) for adjustment of its debts are ongoing and that the automatic stay of proceedings in their appeal over retaliation claims brought by the former employees of a liquidated insurer remains in effect.
ATLANTA — An insured on Aug. 17 defended its appeal asking the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to reverse a lower federal court’s dismissal of its breach of contract lawsuit seeking coverage for its business losses that were “directly caused” by government “stay-at-home” orders in response to the novel coronavirus pandemic, contending that as much as the insurer “would like Florida law to support its arguments, the fact remains that it does not.”