SAN DIEGO — A California federal judge on Nov. 7 granted a reinsurer’s request for a temporary restraining order regarding the sale of property so a reinsurer recover assets it says were fraudulently transferred to avoid payment of a $3.2 million judgment (Odyssey Reinsurance Co. v. Richard Keith Nagby, et al., No. 16-3038, S.D. Calif.).
TULSA, Okla. — In a lawsuit alleging disparagement through false and misleading representation of reinsurance problems, an Oklahoma federal judge on Nov. 7 denied a request by an insurance agency to award costs incurred in the voluntary dismissal of a separate Illinois federal action (The Sandner Group – Alternative Risk Solutions Inc. v. BancFirst Insurance Services Inc., et al., No. 18-0265, N.D. Okla., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190242).
MONTGOMERY, Ala. — In a breach of contract and bad faith case based on the denial of disability benefits, a reinsurer argues to an Alabama federal court in its Nov. 6 reply brief in further support of a motion to dismiss that no contract existed between it and an insured (Horace R. Theriot Jr. v. The Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Co., et al., No. 18-688, M.D. Ala.).
BALTIMORE — A Maryland federal judge on Nov. 6 stayed a dispute over a life insurer’s alleged hiding of its financial status under captive reinsurance schemes and the insurer’s cost of insurance (COI) rate increases pending the parties’ mediation efforts (Leslie S. Rich v. William Penn Life Insurance Company of New York, No. 17-2026, D. Md.).
UTICA, N.Y. — In response to a reinsurer’s motion for reconsideration of a collateral estoppel issue in a dispute over settlements of asbestos claims, an insurer argues on Nov. 6 to a New York federal court that there are no “exceptional circumstances” warranting reconsideration (Utica Mutual Insurance Co. v. Century Indemnity Co., No. 13-995, N.D. N.Y.).
SAN DIEGO — In “the latest in a series of increasingly urgent efforts,” a reinsurer on Nov. 2 requests a temporary restraining order and order to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not be issued from a California federal court so that the reinsurer can recover assets that were fraudulently transferred to avoid payment of a $3.2 million judgment (Odyssey Reinsurance Co. v. Richard Keith Nagby, et al., No. 16-3038, S.D. Calif.).
LEXINGTON, Ky. — Citing a “large volume of discovery,” a farmer accused by the U.S. government of submitting false reports regarding federally reinsured crop insurance policies on Nov. 2 asked a Kentucky federal court to continue trial to sometime after January (United States v. Christopher G. Hickerson, No. 18-cr-00111, E.D. Ky.).
NEW YORK — An insurer and reinsurer notified a New York federal judge on Nov. 2 that an arbitration hearing in their $3.85 million reinsurance dispute involving underlying workers’ compensation losses has been completed and that they are awaiting the arbitration panel’s decision (In re arbitration between National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA v. Federal Insurance Co., No. 16-8821, S.D. N.Y.).
COLUMBIA, S.C. — In South Carolina federal court, a bank sued for its role as trustee of a reinsurance trust for an insolvent insurer on Nov. 2 sought summary judgment against an insurer regarding claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, negligent misrepresentation and civil conspiracy because those claims are time-barred (Accident Insurance Company Inc. v. U.S. Bank National Association, et al., No. 16-2621, D. S.C.).
PORTLAND, Ore. — A health insurer accuses its reinsurer in a Nov. 2 complaint in an Oregon federal court of breaching a reinsurance contract and seeks to recover $1.8 million for losses sustained from the breach (Moda Health Plan Inc. v. Swiss Re Life & Health America Inc., No. 18-01917, D. Ore.).
KANSAS CITY, Kan. — In a second amended complaint, an investor on Nov. 1 added additional parties to a Kansas federal court lawsuit alleging that defendants depleted life insurers’ surplus assets by reinsuring their risks with one another rather than using “arm’s-length reinsurance treaties” (Albert Ogles v. Security Benefit Life Insurance Co., et al., No. 18-02265, D. Kan.).
LEXINGTON, Ky. — The U.S. government in a Nov. 1 indictment filed in a Kentucky federal court accuses a farmer of fraudulently submitting statements to a government agency that reinsures his crops (United States v. Keith Foley, No. 18-cr-00154, E.D. Ky.).
NEW YORK — A New York federal judge on Nov. 1 issued a protective order regarding discovery in a case between a run-off insurer, reinsurers and the reinsurers’ related entities over allegations of mismanagement and misuse of $320 million in investments (Senior Health Insurance Company of Pennsylvania v. Beechwood Re Ltd., et al., No. 18-06658, S.D. N.Y.).
HONOLULU — Addressing motions to dismiss, a Hawaii federal judge on Nov. 2 dismissed in part claims in a homeowner’s second amended complaint alleging unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the placement of insurance, “with unreasonable and inflated premiums” that included “improper compensation through illegal kickback or captive reinsurance arrangements” (Julia Wieck v. CIT Bank, N.A., et al., No. 16-00596, D. Hawaii, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188022).
AKRON, Ohio — An insurer notified an Ohio federal court on Nov. 7 that it was voluntarily dismissing its petition requesting appointment of an umpire for an arbitration panel regarding a dispute under a reinsurance agreement (Envision Insurance Co. v. Hannover Life Reassurance Company of America, No. 18-02047, N.D. Ohio).
NEW YORK — In an Oct. 16 complaint filed in a New York federal court, the Securities and Exchange Commission alleges that two individuals “perpetrated multiple schemes to defraud their advisory clients, which were insurance companies and reinsurance trusts” (Securities and Exchange Commission v. Alexander C. Burns, et al., No. 18-09477, S.D. N.Y.).
CHICAGO — An insolvent insurer’s liquidator on Oct. 29 moved to remand a reinsurer’s Illinois federal court dispute seeking confirmation of an arbitration award for $437,000 in attorney fees, and also filed its reply to a previous motion to dismiss or stay based on a lack of subject matter jurisdiction (Catalina Holdings (Bermuda) Ltd. v. Jennifer Hammer, No. 18-05642, N.D. Ill.).
NEW YORK — An insurance company on Oct 19 filed an amicus curiae brief in support of a rehearing by the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals of its ruling that a reinsurer’s liability follows an insurer’s expense‐supplemental obligations under umbrella policies because the insurer says the decision is “contrary to bedrock principles of reinsurance law and sound public policy favoring settlements” (Utica Mutual Insurance Co. v. Clearwater Insurance Co., Nos. 16-2535 & 16-2824, 2nd Cir.).
SAN DIEGO — In a case over breached reinsurance agreements from fraudulent transfers, a California federal judge on Oct. 15 allowed an insurance broker’s former owner time to respond to why she should not be held in contempt of court regarding an injunction order (Odyssey Reinsurance Co. v. Richard Keith Nagby, et al., No. 16-3038, S.D. Calif.).
NEW YORK — In a New York federal case alleging mismanagement and misuse of $320 million in investments, a run-off insurer argues in an Oct. 29 opposition that reinsurers and related entities fail to address allegations of their active participation in a fraudulent conspiracy in their motion to partially dismiss claims (Senior Health Insurance Company of Pennsylvania v. Beechwood Re Ltd., et al., No. 18-06658, S.D. N.Y.).