Reinsurance Redux – Winter 2014

Reinsurance Redux – Winter 2014

In This Issue:

– New York District Court Grants Summary Judgment for Reinsurer Where Insured’s Loss Did Not Reach Attachment Point Necessary to Trigger Coverage:

The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York granted summary judgment in favor of a reinsurer who had denied coverage to a cedent where the amount of loss claimed failed to reach the attachment point necessary to trigger reinsurance coverage because the interest component of a judgment against the underlying insured was not a “loss” under the terms of the reinsurance certificate. Seneca Insurance Company, Inc. v. Everest Reinsurance Co., No. 11-7846(KBF), 2013 WL 5720455 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2013).

– Eastern District of Michigan Enjoins Arbitration Proceedings Because of Ex Parte Communications Between Counsel and Arbitrator:

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan issued a preliminary injunction enjoining arbitration proceedings to allow an investigation into allegations of ex parte communications with an arbitrator and other improprieties. Star Insurance Co. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, No. 13-13807, 2013 WL5182745 (E.D. Mich. Sept. 12, 2013).

– Florida District Court Dismisses Claims for Reimbursement of Defense Costs Under Reinsurance Treaty and Equitable Estoppel:

The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida dismissed with prejudice an insurer’s claims for defense costs from its reinsurer under either the terms of the reinsurance treaty or an equitable estoppel theory. Public Risk Management of Florida v. One Beacon Insurance Co., No. 6:13-1067-Orl-31TBS, 2013 WL 5705575 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 18, 2013).

– Seventh Circuit Affirms Decision of District Court Requiring Insurance Broker to Pay Rebate to Insurer Even After Termination of Agreement with Broker:

The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the decision of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois following a bench trial in which the district court determined that an insurer was entitled to a rebate under its contract with an insurance broker even though the contract was not renewed. Homeowners Choice, Inc. v. Aon Benfield, Inc., – Fed. App’x –, No. 13-1846, 2013 WL 6670981 (7th Cir. Dec. 19, 2013).

Please see full newsletter below for more information.

 Download PDF

Download PDF[224KB]

Note close

Firefox recommends the PDF Plugin for Mac OS X for viewing PDF documents in your browser.

We can also show you Legal Updates using the Google Viewer; however, you will need to be logged into Google Docs to view them.

Please choose one of the above to proceed!

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

You may also like...

1 Response

  1. jjcourtright24 says:

    It’s obvious you know nothing about any if these streame1. Amhai is a fictional pe1on made up by a streamer named “Reckful” who created him so othe1 could live up to the task of out donating him. He created him a long time ago, although these streame1 would never admit that this head case created him for their own good. Think about for a second how ironic it was only World of Warcraft playe1 receiving donatio1 who are all really good friends in real life. Of cou1e “Amhai” doesn’t want alot said about him because hes NOT real. I don’t know what’s more sad, the fact that you believe some Indian prince would donate to them or that these streame1 are using this as a ploy to reap dividends from fools on the Internet. You don’t have to reply or share this but use some common se1e here because this is a silly marketing ploy by a bunch of headcase twitch streame1. If its too good to be true it always is.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *