We use cookies on this site to enable your digital experience. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our cookie policy. close

Mealey's Reinsurance

  • July 19, 2019

    Liquidators:  Any Recognition Order In Reinsurer’s Bankruptcy Not To Affect Their Proceedings

    NEW YORK — To the extent that a New York bankruptcy court recognizes a foreign proceeding, creditors and parties in interest to a reinsurer’s bankruptcy proceeding ask in a July 16 motion that they be allowed to bring their claims against the debtor in their own proceedings and that those litigations not be subject to any stay (In re Beechwood Re, No. 19-11560, Chapter 15, S.D. N.Y. Bkcy.).

  • July 18, 2019

    Reinsurer Settles With Claims Processor Over Fraudulent Transfer Allegations

    SAN DIEGO — A California federal magistrate judge on July 16 confirmed a settlement reached between a reinsurer and claims processor and its CEO over allegations that they assisted in fraudulently transferring assets belonging to an insolvent insurance agency to avoid paying a $3.2 million judgment (Odyssey Reinsurance Co. v. Richard Keith Nagby, et al., No. 16-3038, S.D. Calif.).

  • July 18, 2019

    Reinsurer:  Judge Should Hear New Case Law Over Collateral Estoppel Issue

    UTICA, N.Y. — A reinsurer argues in a July 15 reply brief that a New York federal judge should reconsider a decision on the issue of collateral estoppel because a recent decision in a similar case “marks a major new development in this case” and requires dismissal of an insurer’s breach of contract claim in a case over coverage for settlements of asbestos claims (Utica Mutual Insurance Co. v. Century Indemnity Co., No. 13-995, N.D. N.Y.).

  • July 18, 2019

    Massachusetts Justice Denies Reinsurers’ Motion To Compel Discovery

    SUFFOLK, Mass. — A Massachusetts justice on June 19 denied a motion to compel filed by reinsurers in an environmental contamination coverage dispute after determining that the reinsurers failed to prove that discovery regarding an insurer’s declaratory judgment action against an insured is relevant to whether coverage exists for a settlement between the insurer and the insured (Lamorak Insurance Co. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, No. 1884CV00200-BLS2, Mass. Super., Suffolk, 2019 Mass. Super. LEXIS 385).

  • July 17, 2019

    $8.65M Loss Suffered In Dispute With Reinsurer, Norwegian Insurer Says

    OSLO, Norway — A Norwegian insurer sustained a $8.65 million loss in an arbitration dispute with its reinsurer over claims related to a 2017 fire in London, according to a July 10 filing.

  • July 17, 2019

    Insurer’s Rehabilitator Asks For Lift Of Stay, Remand Of Reinsurance Dispute

    SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico — An insurer’s rehabilitator on July 8 asked a Puerto Rico federal judge to lift a stay of a dispute between the insurer and various of its reinsurers regarding losses from two hurricanes and then remand the case to the insurer’s rehabilitation proceeding (Integrand Assurance Co. v. Everest Reinsurance Co., et al., No. 19-01111, D. Puerto Rico).

  • July 17, 2019

    Reinsurer Seeks Attorney Fees For Liquidator’s ‘Failed’ Motion To Dismiss Award

    CHICAGO — A reinsurer asks an Illinois federal court in a July 8 motion to award it attorney fees and costs because an insolvent insurer’s liquidator’s motion to vacate a $437,000 arbitration award has “no chance of success” (Catalina Holdings [Bermuda] Ltd. v. Jennifer Hammer, No. 18-5642, N.D. Ill.).

  • July 16, 2019

    Insolvent Insurer’s Owner, President Allege Violation Of Constitutional Rights

    SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico — An insolvent insurer’s stock owner, its president and vice president sued the Puerto Rico insurance commissioner and others on July 11 in a federal court in Puerto Rico, alleging that defendants engaged in a civil conspiracy to deprive them of their constitutional rights (Victor J. Salgado and Associates Inc., et al. v. Javier Rivera-Rios, et al., No. 19-01663, D. P.R.).

  • July 15, 2019

    Judge Dismisses Farmers’ Complaint Against Crop Insurers, Federal Agencies

    DETROIT — A Michigan federal judge on July 12 dismissed a second amended complaint in farmers’ putative class action against crop insurers and the federal agencies that reinsure crop insurers over allegations that the defendants are liable for loss of revenue protection in 2015 because the federal agencies failed to use the actual market price as the harvest price to provide revenue protection under a dry bean revenue endorsement (DBRE) (Gregory Ackerman, et al. v. U.S. Department of Agriculture, et al., No. 17-11779, E.D. Mich., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116080).

  • July 15, 2019

    Federal Judge Dismisses Investor’s RICO Claims In Alleged Reinsurance Scheme

    KANSAS CITY, Kan. — In a dispute over an alleged reinsurance scheme, a Kansas federal judge on July 12 ruled that an investor’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act claim involving the financial strength of an investment company is reverse-preempted under the McCarran-Ferguson Act and that a RICO theory alleging the fraudulent design of the annuity at issue fails to state a claim (Albert Ogles v. Security Benefit Life Insurance Co., et al., No. 18-02265, D. Kan., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116147).

  • July 15, 2019

    Bankruptcy Judge Denies Provisional Relief To Reinsurer’s Liquidator On Security Issue

    NEW YORK — A New York bankruptcy judge on July 10 denied a liquidator’s application for provisional relief staying a decision not yet issued in a New York federal court on a motion seeking an order requiring a reinsurer to post $250 million in additional security (In re Beechwood Re, No. 19-11560, Chapter 15, S.D. N.Y. Bkcy., 2019 Bankr. LEXIS 2077).

  • July 12, 2019

    Judge Dismisses Reinsurer’s Counterclaims On Rescinding Reinsurance Agreement

    NEW YORK — A New York federal judge on July 11 dismissed a reinsurer’s counterclaims seeking a declaration that a reinsurance agreement has been terminated and seeking rescission of that agreement and a return to the status quo pre-contract (AmTrust North America Inc. v. Signify Insurance Ltd., et al., No 18-3779, S.D. N.Y., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115576).

  • July 11, 2019

    Judge Upholds Denial Of Advancement Of Expenses In Runoff Insurer’s Misuse Case

    NEW YORK — In a runoff insurer’s case over allegations of misuse of $320 million by affiliates of a failed Ponzi scheme, a New York federal judge on July 8 denied reconsideration of his ruling denying summary judgment to the affiliates on their counterclaim for advancement of expenses (In re:  Platinum-Beechwood Litigation; Senior Health Insurance Company of Pennsylvania v. Beechwood Re Ltd., et al., No. 18-6658, David Levy v. Senior Health Insurance Company of Pennsylvania, No. 19-3211, and B Asset Manager L.P., et al. v. Senior Health Insurance Company of Pennsylvania, No. 19-4487, S.D. N.Y., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112742).

  • July 11, 2019

    Judge:  Arbitration Panel Needs To Decide If Insurers Can File Motion To Enforce Statutes

    NEW YORK — New York and Indiana security statutes apply to a reinsurer despite pending liquidation proceedings, a New York federal judge held July 10; however, the judge denied a motion to enforce the statutes because an arbitration panel must decide first whether insurers are barred from bringing the motion (In re Platinum-Beechwood litigation, No. 18-06658; Melanie L. Cyganowski, et al. v. Beechwood Re Ltd., et al., Washington National Insurance Co., et al. v. Beechwood Re Ltd., et al., No. 18-12018, S.D. N.Y., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114645).

  • July 11, 2019

    Insurer Asks Court To Ignore Reinsurer’s ‘Frivolous’ Motion For Reconsideration

    UTICA, N.Y. — In response to a reinsurer’s request to renew a motion for reconsideration on allocation and collateral estoppel issues in light of a recent decision in a similar case, an insurer in a July 9 opposition calls that motion “frivolous and another reminder of the wasteful and vexatious way” the reinsurer has litigated the New York federal court case over coverage for settlements of asbestos claims (Utica Mutual Insurance Co. v. Century Indemnity Co., No. 13-995, N.D. N.Y.).

  • July 10, 2019

    Flawed Insurance Product Worsened Clients’ Tax Burdens, Class Suit Alleges

    PHOENIX — In a July 3 complaint filed in an Arizona federal court, plaintiffs allege that defendants “mass-produced a flawed insurance product that exacerbated their clients’ tax burdens” when the product should have “alleviated” those tax burdens while also providing insurance benefits (Benyamin Avrahami, et al. v. Celia Clark, et al., No. 19-04631, D. Ariz.).

  • July 9, 2019

    Former Employee Dismisses Lawsuit Against Reinsurer Over Incentive Payments

    BOSTON — A former employee of a Bermuda reinsurance investment company and an affiliated company notified a Massachusetts federal court on July 2 that she was voluntarily dismissing her lawsuit accusing her former employers of refusing to make incentive payments of $7.45 million allegedly owed to her upon her termination of employment without cause (Alissa Fredricks v. Markel CATCo Investment Management Ltd., et al., No. 19-10331, D. Mass.).

  • July 9, 2019

    Choice-Of-Law Provision In Reinsurance Participation Agreement Is Void, Insureds Say

    OMAHA, Neb. — In a breach of contract case over a workers’ compensation program, insureds argue in a July 2 brief that a Nebraska federal court should not dismiss counterclaims asserted under California law against a reinsurer and its affiliates because a choice-of-law provision found in a reinsurance participation agreement (RPA) is void (Applied Underwriters Captive Risk Assurance Company Inc. v. Ramesh Pitamber & Kusum Pitamber, et al., No. 17-61, D. Neb.).

  • July 8, 2019

    Judge Bars Punitive Damages Testimony, Evidence In Insurer’s Breach Of Duty Case

    COLUMBIA, S.C. — An insurer’s claims over a bank’s alleged breach of duties as trustee of a reinsurance trust for an insolvent insurer are subject to the jurisdiction of the insurer’s liquidation proceeding, a South Carolina federal judge ruled July 3, granting the bank’s motion to exclude testimony and evidence related to punitive damages (Accident Insurance Company Inc. v. U.S. Bank National Association, et al., No. 16-2621, D. S.C., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111371).

  • July 8, 2019

    Judge Grants Judgment To Reinsurer On Fraud Claims Against Shareholders

    SAN DIEGO — In a fraudulent transfer case over a $3.2 million judgment, a California federal judge on July 2 granted summary judgment to a reinsurer on its Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA) claims brought under a theory of constructive fraud against its shareholders, finding no genuine issue of fact as to whether there was a transfer of the assets (Odyssey Reinsurance Co. v. Richard Keith Nagby, et al., No. 16-3038, S.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111794).