NEW YORK — A trustee of a family irrevocable trust sued a life insurer and reinsurer on Oct. 22 in New York federal court over the cost of insurance rate increases imposed on life insurance policies to “reap substantially more profit” for the companies (C. Anthony Gonzalez v. The Lincoln Life & Annuity Company of New York, et al., No. 19-09750, S.D. N.Y.).
ATLANTA — A car dealership and reinsurer argue in an Oct. 7 reply brief that the Georgia Court of Appeals should find a vehicle service contracts administrator liable for interest at the rate of 8 percent per annum on the balance of an arbitration award while the contracts administrator argues on the same day that the court should vacate the $462,781 arbitration award as there is no evidence other than the arbitrator “simply dictating new and different terms than the parties agreed upon” (Adventure Motorsports Reinsurance Ltd., et al. v. Interstate National Dealer Services Inc., No. A20A0036, Interstate National Dealer Services Inc. v. Adventure Motorsports Reinsurance Ltd., et al., No. A20A0037, Ga. App.).
OKLAHOMA CITY — A reinsurer, as the real-party-in-interest, filed a declaratory judgment action on Oct. 21 in an Oklahoma federal court, seeking a determination of an insurer’s duty to defend and indemnify an underlying personal injury lawsuit arising out of a vehicular collision (Star Insurance Co. v. K&J Telecommunications, LLC, et al., No. 19-960, W.D. Okla.).
CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa — A trustee for an irrevocable trust alleges in an Oct. 23 complaint filed in Iowa federal court that a life insurer substantially increased its costs on universal life insurance policies and imposed monthly deduction rate increases to recover prior losses from reinsurance transactions (Angela Terry v. Transamerica Life Insurance Co., No. 19-118, N.D. Iowa).
NEW YORK — Insurers tell a New York federal judge in an Oct. 23 stipulation that they are dismissing their third-party claims, which include fraudulent inducement and violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, against certain third-party defendants in a lawsuit originally filed by a receiver seeking redress for damages arising out of a “massive fraudulent scheme” involving hedge funds (In re Platinum-Beechwood Litigation, No. 18-6658, Melanie L. Cyganowski, et al. v. Beechwood Re Ltd., et al., No. 18-12018; Washington National Insurance Co., et al. v. Mark Nordlicht, et al., No. 18-12018, S.D. N.Y.).
CONCORD, N.H. — A New Hampshire federal judge on Oct. 24 dismissed a suit filed by excess insurers against a number of reinsurers that allegedly refused to pay $22 million in reinsurance billings for asbestos and silica claims paid by the insurers after determining that the prior-pending doctrine warrants dismissal as a similar suit was filed prior to the instant suit in New Jersey state court (United States Fire Insurance Co., et al. v. Equitas Insurance Ltd., et al., No. 18-01205, D. N.H., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 183909).
NEW YORK — A 2017 arbitration panel retains jurisdiction to decide whether new reinsurance billings over an insurer’s settlement of asbestos liability comports with its final award, a New York federal judge ruled Oct. 22, staying the insurer’s new arbitration (Chicago Insurance Co. v. General Reinsurance Corp., et al., No. 18-10450, S.D. N.Y., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182764).
LINCOLN, Neb. — A forum selection clause in a promissory note is unenforceable, the Nebraska Court of Appeals ruled Oct. 22, affirming dismissal of the note holder’s lawsuit seeking the remaining payments for lack of personal jurisdiction (Applied Underwriters, Inc. v. O’Connell Landscape Maintenance, Inc., No. A-18-709, Neb. App., 2019 Neb. App. LEXIS 317).
NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York on Oct. 21 deferred ruling on an investment company’s former executive’s motion for post-acquittal relief, which includes ordering a runoff insurer to advance $708,784.77 in legal fees and costs, until the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals has decided the U.S. government’s appeal of a judgment acquitting the former executive in a related criminal action (In re: Platinum-Beechwood Litigation, No. 18-6658, David Levy v. Senior Health Insurance Company of Pennsylvania, No. 19-3211, S.D. N.Y.).
RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A federal judge in California on Oct. 18 compelled arbitration of a breach of contract case over $8.6 million in equipment breakdown claims because all of an insurer’s claims arise out of a reinsurance agreement’s interpretation (Nationwide Agribusiness Insurance Co. v. The Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Co., No. 19-00531, C.D. Calif.).
UTICA, N.Y. — After a $6.25 million judgment was entered against it in a dispute concerning two separate reinsurance certificates and coverage for settlements of asbestos claims, a reinsurer asks on Oct. 18 that a New York federal court grant judgment as a matter of law on an insurer’s breach of contract claims and affirmative defenses and, in the alternative, grant a new trial on the insurer’s breach of contract claims and the reinsurer’s claim for breach of the duty of utmost good faith (Utica Mutual Insurance Co. v. Century Indemnity Co., No. 13-995, N.D. N.Y.).
SANTA ANA, Calif. — Trucking companies sued the administrators of their self-insured employee benefit plans on Oct. 18 in a California federal court, alleging that the administrators negligently failed to obtain reinsurance coverage for the plans (A&I Transport, Inc., et al. v. KG Administrative Services, Inc., et al., No. 19-1992, C.D. Calif.).
NEW YORK — A New York justice on Oct. 4 dismissed nursing homes’ claims under New York General Business Law Section 350 and New York Insurance Law Section 4226 against a reinsurer and its related entities in a dispute over the legality of a reinsurance participation agreement (RPA) in workers’ compensation insurance policies (Amazing Home Care Services, et al. v. Applied Underwriters Captive Risk Assurance Company, Inc., et al., No. 650789/2018, N.Y. Sup., New York Co., 2019 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 5422).
CHICAGO — An insurance fund on Oct. 2 appealed to the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals a ruling finding that it failed to show that an alter-ego exception applies to the general rule of no liability for a railroad company’s stockholder and failed to prove that a de facto merger occurred in its reinsurance dispute over payments for mine subsidence damages (Illinois Mine Subsidence Insurance Fund v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., No. 19-2965, 7th Cir.).
OMAHA, Neb. — Insureds on Oct. 10 informed a Nebraska federal court of their notice of dismissal without prejudice of their breach of contract dispute over reinsurance participation agreements (RPAs) in a workers’ compensation insurance program (Alpine Building LLC, et al. v. Applied Underwriters Inc., et al., No. 19-00427, D. Neb.).
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — An insured filed objections on Oct. 3 to $10,978.46 as part of the costs issued by a California federal judge following his ruling that the insured failed to demonstrate any economic loss from entering into a reinsurance participation agreement (RPA) and, thus, lacks standing to sue under California unfair competition law (UCL) (Pet Food Express Ltd. v. Applied Underwriters Inc., et al., No. 16-01211, E.D. Calif.).
BALTIMORE — Plaintiffs in consolidated cases concerning an alleged life insurance fraud scheme that shifted debt to reinsurers on Oct. 11 proposed a scheduling order to a Maryland federal court for preliminary approval of the proposed nationwide class action and preliminary certification of settlement class that is unopposed by life insurers (Richard Dickman, et al. v. Banner Life Insurance Co., et al., Nos. 16-192, 17-2026, D. Md.).
BOSTON — A group of reinsurers argue in an Oct. 10 opposition brief that a Massachusetts federal court should deny an insurer’s motion to compel production of documents and interrogatory responses relating to their allocation and billing of their 2009 settlement with an insured in a separate matter because that issue has already been decided and denied (Certain London Market Company Reinsurers v. Lamorak Insurance Co., No. 18-10534, D. Mass.).
NEW YORK — Following an acquittal in a related criminal case, an investment company’s former executive argues in an Oct. 10 reply brief to a New York federal court that there exists no finding that he engaged in any wrongdoing and, therefore, a runoff insurer is obligated to advance his legal fees and costs and make immediate advancement payment to him of $708,784.77 (In re: Platinum-Beechwood Litigation, No. 18-6658, David Levy v. Senior Health Insurance Company of Pennsylvania, No. 19-3211, S.D. N.Y.).
OMAHA, Neb. — A former employee of a federally reinsured crop insurer in an Oct. 2 amended answer in a Nebraska federal court denies allegations that she breached a nonsolicitation agreement and counterclaims for age and sex discrimination against her former employer (Farm Credit Services of America FLCA v. Kathy Mens, No. 19-14, D. Neb.).