Newsletter RSS

Mealey's Reinsurance

  • September 18, 2020

    Judge Dismisses Suit Against JPMorgan Over Reinsurance Investment

    CHICAGO — An Illinois federal judge on Sept. 16 dismissed a negligent misrepresentation and breach of fiduciary duty suit against JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. and its related entities because clients of the bank failed to show how JPMorgan negligently failed to disclose that a reinsurance business "did not believe it would be profitable early on" (Green Dolphin Capital LLC, et al. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., et al., No. 19-6940, N.D. Ill., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169822).

  • September 17, 2020

    No Response To Farmer's U.S. High Court Petition Over Crop Insurer's Arbitration Award

    ST. LOUIS — A federally reinsured crop insurer on July 20 waived any response to a farmer's petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court asking whether a "good farming practices" dispute can be resolved in private arbitration or must proceed through an administrative review process as provided for under the Federal Crop Insurance Act (FCIA) (Terry R. Balvin v. Rain and Hail LLC, No. 20-3, U.S. Sup., 2020 U.S. S. CT. BRIEFS LEXIS 2601).

  • September 17, 2020

    Final Judgment Denied In Excess Insurer's Case With Reinsurer, Municipality Insurer

    LOS ANGELES — Noting that an appeal of a prior ruling may still occur, a California federal judge on Sept. 4 denied a final judgment ruling in an excess insurer's coverage dispute with a joint powers authority for municipalities and a reinsurer over a $16.8 million settlement of an accident between two California cities' fire departments (StarStone National Insurance Company v. Independent Cities Risk Management Authority, et al., No. 19-1130, C.D. Calif.).

  • September 16, 2020

    No Meaningful Objection To Stay Of Discovery In Kickback Scheme Suit, Insurers Say

    NEW HAVEN, Conn. — Insurers and a mortgage lender argue in a Sept. 1 reply brief that a homeowner does not meaningfully address their request for a stay of discovery but rather rehashes arguments over the filed-rate doctrine in their pending motions to dismiss the homeowner's Connecticut federal court lawsuit alleging a kickback scheme over force-placed insurance (FPI) (Robert R. Lewis v. M&T Bank Corp., et al., No. 20-552, D. Conn.).

  • September 16, 2020

    Insurer Asked To Respond To Discovery In Coverage Suit Over $73.21M Verdict

    WILMINGTON, Del. — The operator of general acute care hospitals and its related entities on Sept. 15 ask the Delaware Superior Court to order a health care umbrella insurer to respond to discovery requests over its reinsurance segment in a coverage dispute regarding a $73.21 million verdict against one of the operator's entities in an underlying medical malpractice suit (Steadfast Insurance Company v. Community Health Systems, Inc., et al., No. N18C-11-127, Del. Super.).

  • September 16, 2020

    Insurer Awarded $1.2M Prejudgment Interest In Dispute With Reinsurer

    NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York on Sept. 15 awarded $1,250,597.81 in prejudgment interest to an umbrella insurer following a previous ruling that an English reinsurer is responsible for $7,234,125 of the umbrella insurer's environmental claims settlement over a Dole Food Co. subsidiary's California housing development (The Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania v. Equitas Insurance Limited, No. 17-6850, S.D. N.Y.).

  • September 14, 2020

    Reinsurer Seeks Dismissal Of Insurance Agent's Suit Over Future Demands On Premiums

    FORT WORTH, Texas — A Cayman Islands reinsurer in a Sept. 11 motion seeks dismissal of an insurance agent's preemptive declaratory judgment suit in a Texas federal court for breach of a quota share reinsurance agreement because the agent does not allege an "actual controversy" over the reinsurer's potential future demands for the return of any premiums (Contractor Managing General Insurance Agency, Inc. v. Greenlight Reinsurance, Ltd., No. 20- 996, N.D. Texas).

  • September 14, 2020

    Insurers Respond To Reinsurers' Breach Of Contract Counterclaims

    LOS ANGELES — Insurers on Sept. 10 asserted affirmative defenses to a reinsurer's breach of contract and declaratory relief counterclaims seeking damages of $11.5 million plus prejudgment interest from the insurers in their California federal court dispute over denied reinsurance payments for livery claims, trucking claims and habitability claims (California Capital Insurance Co., et al. v. Maiden Reinsurance North America, Inc., No. 20-1264, C.D. Calif.).

  • September 11, 2020

    Health Insurer Sues Reinsurer For Failing To Pay Claim Of $950,742.64

    DETROIT — A reinsurer breached a medical excess reinsurance agreement by refusing to indemnify a claim for $950,742.64 relating to an insured's medical services, a health and life insurer alleges in a Sept. 10 complaint filed in a Michigan federal court (Alliance Health and Life Insurance Company v. American National Insurance Company, No. 20-12479, E.D. Mich.).

  • September 10, 2020

    Delaware High Court Denies Insurers' Appeal Of Ruling In Reinsurer's Rehabilitation

    WILMINGTON, Del. — The Delaware Supreme Court on Sept. 4 denied life insurers' appeals over efforts in a reinsurer's rehabilitation to obtain offsets or recoupment of claim payments and reinsurance premiums under a settlement agreement because the insurers could still recover on their unpaid claims as part of the rehabilitation process (Protective Life Insurance Company, et al. v. Trinidad Navarro, Nos. 217, 2020 & 218, 2020, Del. Sup., 2020 Del. LEXIS 300).

  • September 10, 2020

    Reinsurer Opposes Bid To File Third-Party Complaint Over $844M Judgment

    MIAMI — An English reinsurer in a Sept. 4 response argues that a Florida federal court should deny leave to claimants to file a third-party complaint regarding settlements reached over a $844 million default in connection with a plane crash near Medellin, Colombia (Priscila Elen De Souza Lima, et al. v. Linea Aerea Merida Internacional De Aviacion, et al., No. 20-23631, S.D. Fla.).

  • September 09, 2020

    Reinsurer Removes Agent's Suit Over Future Demands On Premiums To Federal Court

    FORT WORTH, Texas — A Cayman Islands reinsurer on Sept. 4 removed to a Texas federal court an insurance agent's suit alleging that amendments to a quota share reinsurance agreement bar the reinsurer from making future demands for the return of any premiums (Contractor Managing General Insurance Agency, Inc. v. Greenlight Reinsurance, Ltd., No. 20- 996, N.D. Texas).

  • September 09, 2020

    Judge Grants Jurisdictional Discovery In ERISA Case Against Bermuda Reinsurer

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A District of Columbia federal judge on Sept. 2 refused to dismiss an Employee Retirement Income Security Act lawsuit against a Bermuda reinsurance and insurance company for damages from the alleged failure to make $934 million in withdrawal liability payments and, instead, granted plan trustees' motion for jurisdictional discovery (Michael H. Holland, et al. v. Cardem Insurance Company Ltd., No. 19-02362, D. D.C.).

  • September 08, 2020

    Reinsurer: Insurer Cannot Seek New Money Damages Following Favorable Ruling

    NEW YORK — A reinsurer argues in a Sept. 3 opposition brief that a New York federal judge should reject an insurer's "after-the-fact effort to add" $459,652.22 reflecting "unsecured paid losses" to a judgment in the insurer's favor on breach of contract and declaratory judgment claims (AmTrust North America, Inc. v. Signify Insurance Ltd., et al., No 18-3779, S.D. N.Y.).

  • September 08, 2020

    Reinsurer Seeks Dismissal From Theater's Proposed Class Suit For Pandemic Losses

    MIAMI — A French reinsurance company on Sept. 3 moved to dismiss a theater operator's proposed class action in a Florida federal court for pandemic loss, saying the reinsurer was not a party to an all-risk insurance policy and cannot be held liable for the acts of its second-tier subsidiary (Actors Playhouse Productions, Inc. v. SCOR Se, et al., No. 20-22981, S.D. Fla.).

  • September 04, 2020

    Panel Affirms Denial Of Reinsurer's Bid To Intervene In Creditor's $3.2M Dispute

    SAN FRANCISCO — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Sept. 2 upheld the denial of a reinsurer's motion to intervene as untimely in a case over a $3.2 million judgment and found that the reinsurer lacked standing to challenge another order disbursing registry funds to a judgment creditor (Odyssey Reinsurance Company v. Richard Keith Nagby, et al. v. Knight Insurance Company Ltd., Nos. 19-55346, 19-55347, 19-55423, 9th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 27976).

  • September 03, 2020

    Insurer's Liquidator Agrees To Arbitration With Reinsurers Of $150M Hurricane Loss Case

    BOSTON — Integrand Assurance Co.'s liquidator on Aug. 11 dismissed an appeal with the First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals and agreed to arbitrate with reinsurers a $150 million hurricane loss dispute (Integrand Assurance Co. v. Everest Reinsurance Co., et al., No. 20-1534, 1st Cir.).

  • September 02, 2020

    Excess Insurers Oppose Reinsurer's Declaratory Judgment Counterclaim

    SAN FRANCISCO — Two excess insurers on Aug. 25 responded to a reinsurer's declaratory judgment counterclaim in a California federal court, alleging that the reinsurer is estopped and waived from seeking to inspect their claim reporting of an insured's asbestos liabilities (New Hampshire Insurance Company, et al. v. TIG Insurance Company, No. 20-04668, N.D. Calif.).

  • September 02, 2020

    Reinsurers, Brokers Make Case For Summary Judgment In Breach Of Contract Suit

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Suggesting that a financial service company distorts and mischaracterizes the evidence, reinsurers and reinsurance brokers on Aug. 31 pushed back as to why they and not the financial service company should be awarded summary judgment by a District of Columbia federal court in a breach of contract dispute over a $26 million award (Vantage Commodities Financial Services I, LLC v. Assured Risk Transfer PCC, LCC, et al., No. 17-01451, D. D.C.).

  • August 27, 2020

    COMMENTARY: Do Arbitration Panels Have The Authority To Order Remote Arbitrations?

    By Robert M. Hall