NEW YORK — Three insurers agreed in an April 7 filing to drop their New York state court lawsuit against their reinsurer over $1.3 million in reinsurance proceeds for an underlying settlement of lawsuits involving asbestos and tainted blood-clotting products (Granite State Insurance Co., et al. v. R&Q Reinsurance Co., No. 654494/2013, N.Y. Sup., New York Co.).
NEW YORK — Accused by insureds of a fraudulent workers’ compensation scheme involving a reinsurance participation agreement, reinsurers assert their own breach of contract counterclaim in a May 4 answer to a New York federal court, alleging that the insureds failed to pay $2.7 million in premiums (National Convention Services, LLC, et al. v. Applied Underwriters Captive Risk Assurance Company, Inc., et al., No. 15-cv-07063, S.D. N.Y.).
ATLANTA — In a case over fraudulent transfers of reinsurance funds, insurers on May 1 moved for a Georgia federal court to compel individuals to provide documents pertaining to a reinsurer after having failed to previously satisfy a discovery order (Canal Insurance Co. and Canal Indemnity Co. v. Golden Isles Reinsurance Company Ltd, et al., No. 15-cv-03331, N.D. Ga.).
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — A reinsurer argues in its April 28 reply brief that a Connecticut federal court should grant reconsideration of an order confirming an arbitration award because the court was not required to enter judgment in sum certain (General Re Life Corp. v. The Lincoln National Life Insurance Co., No. 15-cv-01860, D. Conn.).
CHICAGO — Finding that a reinsurer abandoned its defense and any claims against a life insurance company, an Illinois federal judge on April 11 entered a $2,716,527.64 default judgment to the insurer against the reinsurer in a dispute over medical reinsurance proceeds (Guarantee Trust Life Insurance Co. v. American Medical and Life Insurance Co., No. 10-cv-02125, N.D. Ill.).
SYRACUSE, N.Y. — In an asbestos coverage dispute, a reinsurer on May 15 asked a New York federal court to reconsider a discovery ruling and to compel an insurer to produce all post-complaint, internal documents involving coverage issues relating to primary and umbrella policies (Utica Mutual Insurance Co. v. R&Q Reinsurance Co., No. 15-cv-270, N.D. N.Y.).
PHILADELPHIA — An insurer adequately alleged a relationship between an insurance policy and a reinsurance contract, even without reference to a cession statement, a Pennsylvania federal judge ruled May 12, denying the reinsurer’s motion for judgment on the pleadings on the insurer’s breach of contract counterclaim (R&Q Reinsurance Co. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co., No. 16-cv-01473, E.D. Pa., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72964).
BOSTON — A collection of insurance syndicates sued an insurer on April 11 in Massachusetts federal court, seeking to compel arbitration with regard to their involvement in an underlying coverage dispute over environmental claims that would affect reinsurance billings (Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London v. Transport Insurance Co., No. 17-10618, D. Mass.).
SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge excluded on May 10 lay opinion testimony by a reinsurance risk management company’s chief financial officer in a breach of contract lawsuit about funds that were improperly withdrawn from bank accounts (Les Fields/C.C.H.I. Insurance Services v. Stuart M. Hines, et al., No. 15-03728, N.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71620).
NEW YORK — In a dispute over reinsurance proceeds allegedly owed to the estate of The Home Insurance Co., the liquidator on May 11 requested a pre-motion conference in a New York federal court to address an amendment to his complaint against a reinsurer to assert an additional claim of $362,787.84 (Roger A. Sevigny, the Commissioner of Insurance of the State of New Hampshire, as Liquidator of The Home Insurance Company v. Trygvesta Forsikring A/S, as successor in interest to Skandinavia Insurance Company Ltd., Trygvesta Forsikring A/S v. Cerberus Holding Company, LLC., No. 16-cv-04874, S.D. N.Y.).
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — A Connecticut federal judge on May 4 stayed a breach of contract dispute between a reinsurer and insurer so that the parties could pursue a settlement agreement (Travelers Casualty and Surety Co., f/k/a The Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. v. Century Indemnity Co. as successor to Insurance Company of North America, No. 16-cv-170, D. Conn.).
PHILADELPHIA — Homeowners filed a first amended class action complaint on April 26 in a Pennsylvania federal court, alleging a captive reinsurance scheme between banks and an affiliated reinsurer in violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) (Christopher Blake and James Orkis v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., et al., No. 13-6433, E.D. Pa.).
PHILADELPHIA — The Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on May 8 dismissed an appeal of a group of mortgage borrowers challenging a lower court ruling that their mortgage insurance reinsurance kickback claims were time-barred (William Weiss, et al. v. Bank of America Corp., et al., No. 16-4386, 3rd Cir.).
NEW YORK — A New York federal judge on May 9 scheduled oral argument on whether a dispute regarding reinsurance of workers’ compensation risks should be sent to arbitration for a panel to decide (In the Matter of the Arbitration Between National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA v. Federal Insurance Co., No. 16-cv-08821, S.D. N.Y.).
CHICAGO — A mortgage insurance reinsurer argues in a May 5 reply brief to an Illinois federal court that the rehabilitator of two insolvent insurers failed to assert sufficient allegations to support breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing claims (People of the State of Illinois, ex rel., Anne Melissa Dowling, Acting Director of Insurance of the State of Illinois, as Rehabilitator for Triad Guaranty Insurance Corporation and Triad Guaranty Assurance Corp. v. AAMBG Reinsurance Inc., No. 16-cv-07477, N.D. Ill.).
NEW YORK — In support of a breach of contract claim in an insurance coverage dispute over flood damage at a construction site, construction companies failed to show that their insurer’s settlement caused them to pay a $50,000 deductible under a captive reinsurance agreement, a New York federal judge ruled May 4, dismissing the complaint (Keller Foundations LLC, et al. v. Zurich American Insurance Co., No. 16-6751, S.D. N.Y., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68902).
CHICAGO — The rehabilitator of two insolvent insurers argues in an April 21 brief in an Illinois federal court that there are sufficient allegations to support breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing claims against a mortgage insurance reinsurer (People of the State of Illinois, ex rel., Anne Melissa Dowling, Acting Director of Insurance of the State of Illinois, as Rehabilitator for Triad Guaranty Insurance Corporation and Triad Guaranty Assurance Corp. v. AAMBG Reinsurance Inc., No. 16-cv-07477, N.D. Ill.).
SYRACUSE, N.Y. — In response to a reinsurer’s request for documents concerning primary and umbrella policies at issue in asbestos coverage dispute, an insurer argues to a New York federal court in an April 7 brief that it has provided admissions, denials, responses and objections regarding the documents (Utica Mutual Insurance Co. v. R&Q Reinsurance Co., No. 15-cv-270, N.D. N.Y.).
NEW HAVEN, Conn. — Select Insurance Co. on April 12 voluntarily dismissed its Connecticut federal court case demanding $1.1 million in retrocessional proceeds from Excalibur Reinsurance Corp. for an underlying settlement of claims filed against Ernst & Young (Select Insurance Co. v. Excalibur Reinsurance Corp., f/k/a PMA Capital Insurance Co., No. 15-cv-00715, D. Conn.).
PHILADELPHIA — Because an insurer never linked an underlying policy to a facultative certificate, a reinsurer argues in its April 11 reply brief to a Pennsylvania federal court that the insurer’s breach of contract counterclaim should be dismissed as there is no contract between the parties reinsuring that policy (R&Q Reinsurance Co. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co., No. 16-cv-01473, E.D. Pa.).