We use cookies on this site to enable your digital experience. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our cookie policy. close

Mealey's Insurance Pleadings

  • February 27, 2019

    Insureds Seek Reinstatement Of $1.3M Jury Award For CPA Claim Against Insurer

    SEATTLE — Insureds recently asked a Washington appeals court to reverse a lower court’s remittitur of the $1,345,317.24 that a jury awarded for an insurer’s violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act (CPA) and remand for entry of a judgment on the full jury verdict with interest tolling from the date of the initial judgment (Jeff McNabb & Elaine McNabb v. Metropolitan Property and Casualty Insurance Company, No. 77832-3, Wash. App., Div. 1).

  • February 26, 2019

    Insurer Appeals Denial Of Motion To Intervene, $5.9M Judgment To Missouri Panel

    KANSAS CITY, Mo. — An insurer asked a Missouri appeals court to reverse a lower court’s ruling that denied its motion to intervene and entered a final judgment confirming a $5,998,027 arbitration award in favor of a claimant who was involved with a motor vehicle accident with its insured (Jennifer Britt v. Jeremy Otto & American Family Mutual Insurance Company, S.I., WD81830, Mo., App., Western Div.).

  • February 26, 2019

    Insured Says Coverage Owed For Gasoline Released From Alabama Pipeline

    ATLANTA — An insured claims in a Feb. 13 complaint filed in Georgia federal court that its insurer breached its contract in denying coverage under a pollution liability policy for clean-up costs and damages incurred as a result of the release of gasoline from one of the insured’s pipelines (Colonial Pipeline Co. v. AIG Specialty Insurance Co., No. 19-762, N.D. Ga.).

  • February 25, 2019

    Railroad Company Seeks Judgment On Alter-Ego Claim In Reinsurance Case

    SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — In a reinsurance coverage dispute over payment for mine subsidence damages, a railroad company argues in a Feb. 20 brief that an Illinois federal court should grant it summary judgment on alter-ego and de facto merger claims (Illinois Mine Subsidence Insurance Fund v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., No. 17-3199, C.D. Ill.).

  • February 25, 2019

    Promissory Note Maker Objects To Recommendation Denying Class Certification

    LINCOLN, Neb. — In a dispute over a promissory note executed pursuant to a reinsurance participation agreement (RPA), the promissory note maker on Feb. 20 filed an objection to a Nebraska magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny class certification and asks that its proposed New Jersey class be certified (Applied Underwriters Inc. v. Top’s Personnel Inc., No. 15-90, D. Neb.).

  • February 21, 2019

    Investment Companies Seek Dismissal Of RICO Claim In Alleged Reinsurance Scheme

    KANSAS CITY, Kan. — In a dispute over an alleged reinsurance scheme, investment companies assert in Feb. 19 reply briefs to a Kansas federal court that an investor’s claims for violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and unjust enrichment should be dismissed (Albert Ogles v. Security Benefit Life Insurance Co., et al., No. 18-02265, D. Kan.).

  • February 20, 2019

    Federally Reinsured Crop Insurer: Noncompete Provision Is Enforceable

    OMAHA, Neb. — A federally reinsured crop insurer says in a Feb. 18 reply brief that a Nebraska federal judge was correct to find that a former employee’s noncompete provision in an assignment, nonsolicitation and nondisclosure agreement was enforceable under Nebraska law (Farm Credit Services of America FLCA v. Kathy Mens, No. 19-14, D. Neb.).

  • February 19, 2019

    Insurer Says It Owes No Duty To Defend In Underlying Case; ‘Occurrence’ Lacking

    BOSTON — An insurance company recently asked the First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to find that a lower court erred when it held that the conduct of a class of plaintiffs in an underlying action comprised an “occurrence” that then obligated the insurer to defend a utility company that was the defendant in that underlying case (Zurich American Insurance Company v. Electricity Maine LLC, et al., No. 18-1968, 1st Cir.).

  • February 19, 2019

    Banks Seek Judgment On Damages In Insurers’ Special Deputy Receiver’s Lawsuit

    ST. LOUIS — Two banks assert in a Feb. 14 reply brief that a Missouri federal court should grant their motion for partial judgment on claims for certain alleged categories of damages in a dispute filed by a special deputy receiver and state insurance guaranty associations regarding allegations over the mishandling of insolvent funeral insurers’ funds (Jo Ann Howard & Associates P.C., et al. v. J. Douglas Cassity, et al., No. 09-01252, E.D. Mo.).

  • February 15, 2019

    Reinsurers Say Motion To Dismiss Is Not Improper ‘Third Bite At The Apple’

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a District of Columbia federal court dispute over a $26 million arbitration award, reinsurers assert in a Feb. 13 brief that their motion to dismiss a financial service company’s amended complaint is not an improper “third bite at the apple” despite concerning issues raised in their prior opposition to a motion for leave to amend (Vantage Commodities Financial Services I, LLC v. Assured Risk Transfer PCC, LCC, et al., No. 17-01451, D. D.C.).

  • February 14, 2019

    Hedge Fund Liquidators: Specific Allegations Exist In Fraud, Conspiracy Case

    NEW YORK — In their fraud and conspiracy lawsuit, liquidators for two hedge funds tell a New York federal court in a Feb. 11 brief that they have asserted specific allegations to withstand motions to dismiss their amended complaint claiming that funds with a net asset value of nearly $1 billion turned out not only to be insolvent but also to have liabilities between $400 million and $800 million (Martin Trott, et al. v. Platinum Management [NY] LLC, et al., No. 18-10936, S.D. N.Y.).

  • February 14, 2019

    No Coverage Owed For Mold Found In Attic Insulation, Insurer Says In Complaint

    SALT LAKE CITY — No coverage is owed to an insured for an underlying claim alleging that the insured’s installation of attic insulation caused mold to develop in attics of condominium buildings because the policy’s fungi or bacteria exclusion clearly precludes coverage, the insurer says in a Feb. 7 complaint filed in Utah federal court (Cincinnati Specialty Underwriters Insurance Co. v. Green Property Solutions LLC, et al., No. 19-100, C.D. Utah).

  • February 13, 2019

    Insurer Argues Appraisal Should Have Been Conducted In Hurricane Irma Dispute

    WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — Florida insureds “should not be rewarded for racing to the courthouse to commence litigation in lieu of participating in appraisal,” an insurer argues to a Florida appeals court in a Hurricane Irma coverage dispute in an effort to allow it to pursue its injunctive relief counterclaim or, in the alternative, specific performance of its right to compel appraisal and its concomitant right to repair (People’s Trust Insurance  Company v. Parvin Nowroozpour, et al., No. 4D18-2810, Fla. App., 4th Dist.).

  • February 13, 2019

    Ruling Predicated On Appraisal Award That Should Have Never Existed, Insurer Argues

    MIAMI — A homeowners insurer recently asked a Florida appeals court to reverse a lower court’s ruling in favor of its insured in a Hurricane Wilma dispute, arguing that the lower court erred in compelling appraisal, denying its motion to vacate the appraisal award and granting summary judgment “predicated on an appraisal award that should never have existed” (Gulfstream Property & Casualty Insurance Company v. David Coley, No. 3D18-0476, Fla. App., 3rd Dist.).

  • February 12, 2019

    Policy Coverage For Jewelry Store Shooting Before California Court

    SAN FRANCISCO — Whether a homeowners insurance policy’s personal injury provision covers the discharge of a firearm after a robbery attempt turns on whether the parties’ portrayal of the resulting injuries as willful or accidental and confronts a California appeals court (CSAA Insurance Exchange, et al. v. Oscar Herrera, No. A153429, Calif. App., 1st Dist.).

  • February 12, 2019

    Coverage Dispute Insurer: Title Policy Does Not Cover Loss Of Value Claim

    ATLANTA — An insurer on Dec. 31 filed a brief in the Georgia Court of Appeals contending that it should set aside a lower court’s judgment in favor of a property owner because loss of value flowing from actual environmental contamination is not covered by a title insurance policy (Old Republic National Title Insurance Company v. RM Kids LLC, No. A19A0971, Ga. App.).

  • February 12, 2019

    Federally Reinsured Crop Insurer’s Preliminary Injunction Opposed

    OMAHA, Neb. — A former employee for a federally reinsured crop insurer tells a Nebraska federal judge in a Feb. 8 opposition brief that an injunction for alleged breach of an employment agreement is not warranted because a noncompete agreement is overbroad and unenforceable (Farm Credit Services of America FLCA v. Kathy Mens, No. 19-14, D. Neb.).

  • February 12, 2019

    Insurance Agency, Agent Seek Documents By Trustees In Disparagement Case

    TULSA, Okla. — In a lawsuit over alleged disparagement to a self-insurance products distributor during the promotion of a competitor’s products to school districts, an insurance agency and agent in a Feb. 8 motion ask an Oklahoma federal court to compel the trustees of Oklahoma School Risk Management Trust (OSRMT) to produce certain documents (The Sandner Group – Alternative Risk Solutions Inc. v. BancFirst Insurance Services Inc., et al., No. 18-0265, N.D. Okla.).

  • February 12, 2019

    Condo Association Sues Insurer In Florida Court Over Hurricane Irma Damage

    NAPLES, Fla. — A Collier County, Fla., condominium association on Feb. 8 sued its insurer in a Florida court for breach of contract and sought a declaration as to coverage for its property damage caused by Hurricane Irma, contending that the property remains in an “unfinished and damaged” condition as a result of the insurer’s refusal to provide it full compensation for its damages (Waterford Condominium Association Of Collier County, Inc. v. Empire Indemnity Insurance Company, No. 18-3753, Fla. Cir., Collier Co.).

  • February 12, 2019

    Insurer Removes Water Damage Coverage Dispute To Florida Federal Court

    MIAMI — In a Feb. 11 notice of removal, an insurer maintains that a Florida federal court has jurisdiction to decide a water damage coverage dispute because the insured’s complaint, seeking more than $80,000 in additional damages, exceeds the federal jurisdictional amount in controversy requirement (Sushi Garage LLC v. Greenwich Insurance Co., No. 19-20548, S.D. Fla.).