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.).
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico — Noting that the Puerto Rico insurance commissioner rehashes previously rejected arguments, a federal judge in Puerto Rico on Oct. 9 refused to dismiss a first amended complaint filed by shareholders and officers of an insolvent insurer over their allegations of a civil conspiracy to deprive constitutional rights to them (Victor J. Salgado and Associates Inc., et al. v. Javier Rivera-Rios, et al., No. 19-1663, D. Puerto Rico).
ATLANTA — A car dealership and reinsurer argue in a Sept. 16 brief to the Georgia Court of Appeals that there is no reason to vacate a $462,971 arbitration award for manifest disregard of law while a vehicle service contracts administrator says in its response brief filed the same day that there is no basis for an attorney fees award (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.).
RALEIGH, N.C. — The North Carolina Supreme Court on Sept. 25 denied an auto insurer’s petition to review the state’s insurance commissioner’s decision reversing the North Carolina reinsurance facility’s denial of reimbursement to the insurer for an $11 million bad faith settlement (The North Carolina Reinsurance Facility v. Mike Causey, et al., No. 261P19, N.C. Sup., 2019 N.C. LEXIS 953).
NEW YORK — A New York justice on Sept. 26 denied a reinsurance broker and its parent company’s request for preliminary injunctions against two former employees and dismissed a competitor from their breach of contract lawsuit (Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., et al. v. Kevin Feldman, et al., No. 652284/2019, N.Y. Sup., New York Co., 2019 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 5243).
NEW YORK — In a 176-page ruling, a New York federal judge on Oct. 7 gave reasons for granting in part motions to dismiss investment fund receiver’s claims, insurers’ third-party claims and a run-off insurer’s third-party claims in a $320 million “massive fraudulent scheme” dispute (In re Platinum-Beechwood Litigation, No. 18-6658, Melanie L. Cyganowski, et al. v. Beechwood Re Ltd., et al., No. 18-12018, S.D. N.Y., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173830).
JASPER, Ala. — In response to an insurer’s motion to dismiss, a woman argues on Oct. 3 that an Alabama federal court should deny the motion and exercise its supplemental jurisdiction over her lawsuit against the city of Jasper and its employees over sexual misconduct in a jail allegations as well as her claim as judgment creditor as an assignee of the insurer’s rights under reinsurance agreements (Whitley Goodson v. J.C. Poe Jr., et al., No. 19-1399, N.D. Ala.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Colorado insurance liquidation law precludes the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) from using money owed to an insolvent Colorado insurer to pay debts owed under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) reinsurance and risk-adjustment programs, a judge in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims ruled Oct. 3 (Michael Conway v. The United States, No. 18-1623, Fed. Clms., 2019 U.S. Claims LEXIS 1306).