• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Reinsurance Focus

New reinsurance-related and arbitration developments from Carlton Fields

  • About
    • Events
  • Articles
    • Treaty Tips
    • Special Focus
    • Market
  • Contact
  • Exclusive Content
    • Blog Staff Picks
    • Cat Risks
    • Regulatory Modernization
    • Webinars
  • Subscribe
You are here: Home / Archives for Arbitration / Court Decisions

Arbitration / Court Decisions

Court remands case to new arbitration panel for further proceedings

January 22, 2007 by Carlton Fields

After partially vacating an arbitration award as being in manifest disregard of law, a District Court has remanded the case to a new arbitration panel for further proceedings. The Court found it inappropriate to remand the case to the same arbitration panel for further proceedings relating to the issue as to which it had found that the panel had manifestly disregarded Pennsylvania law. Koken v. Cologne Reinsurance (Barbados) Ltd., Case No. 98-0678 (USDC MD Pa Dec. 5, 2006).

Filed Under: Arbitration Process Issues, Confirmation / Vacation of Arbitration Awards, Week's Best Posts

District Judge files appellate brief in KPMG criminal tax case

January 22, 2007 by Carlton Fields

In a highly unusual event, United States District Judge Lewis Kaplan has filed a brief with the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, defending his opinion relating to the arbitrability of issues relating to KPMG paying attorneys fees for defendants in a criminal tax action, which was the subject of a post on this blog on September 26, 2006. This brief was invited by the Second Circuit in an Order entered December 13, 2006, which provided in part: “Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 21(b)(4), we now invite the District Court to address, if it so chooses, the motion for leave to file a mandamus petition.” Stein v. KPMG, LLP, Case No. 06-4358 (2d Cir. Jan. 8, 2007).

Filed Under: Arbitration / Court Decisions, Criminal Actions

Court stays enforcement of arbitral award pending ruling by liquidation court on set off claim

January 18, 2007 by Carlton Fields

LDG Re reinsured workers' compensation and employers' liability risks retained by Legion Insurance and a related company under two quota share reinsurance agreements. LDG Re booked the reinsurance into a pool facility in which a number of companies participated, including Chartwell Reinsurance (which was later purchased by Trenwick America Reinsurance). When LDG failed to make timely payments under the quota share agreements, Legion demanded arbitration. A settlement was reached. When LDG allegedly failed to make payments required by the settlement agreement, Legion sought to reactivate the arbitration. LDG objected, contending that the dispute was not arbitrable and that the pool members were entitled to set off other debts owed to them by Legion. The panel entered an award purporting to enforce the settlement agreement, requiring a payment by LDG of over $5 million, not mentioning the set off request. Legion moved to confirm the award, and Trenwick moved to intervene in both the District Court action and in Legion's liquidation proceeding in Pennsylvania state court, seeking to assert a set off. In a Memorandum Opinion, followed by an Order and Judgment, the District Court confirmed the arbitration award, but stayed execution pending the submission by Legion or Trenwick of a motion in the liquidation proceeding seeking a ruling as to whether the claimed set off should be allowed. Koken v. LDG Re Corp., Case No. 06-81 (USDC ED Pa. Dec. 29, 2006).

Filed Under: Confirmation / Vacation of Arbitration Awards, Reinsurance Claims, Week's Best Posts

Courts continue confirmation of arbitration awards

January 17, 2007 by Carlton Fields

Two recent rulings addressed the confirmation of arbitration awards:

  • The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed the confirmation of an arbitration award in a non-insurance case, rejecting a contention that the award construed a contract in such a way that it violated a First Circuit standard that prohibits the interpretation of contracts “in a way that cannot possibly be described as plausible or rational.”  Vital Basics Inc. v. Vertrue Inc., Case No. 05-2741 (1st Cir. Dec. 29, 2006).

  • A New York state court ruled that an arbitration award should be confirmed under New York law, since it was not arbitrary, capricious, or irrational, and the losing party had failed to prove its contention that the arbitrator had improperly prejudiced its rights and the integrity of the arbitral process due to purported ex parte contacts with opposing counsel.  Mounier v. American Transit Ins. Co., Case No. 2005-03804 (NY Sup.Ct. App.Div. Jan. 9, 2007).

Filed Under: Confirmation / Vacation of Arbitration Awards, Week's Best Posts

Court denies request to overrule privilege claim in connection with alleged fraud

January 16, 2007 by Carlton Fields

A US District Court has denied a motion to overrule a Magistrate Judge's ruling, which denied a motion to overrule a claim of attorney-client privilege, in a case alleging fraud in a rent-a-captive insurance program involving Legion Insurance, which is in liquidation. The motion sought discovery from an attorney who allegedly participated in the alleged fraud. The circumstamces of the brief rulings are set out in the objections to the Magistrate Judge's ruling. Koken v. American Patriot Ins. Agency, Inc., Case No. 05-1049 (USDC ND Ill. Dec. 4, 2006).

Filed Under: Discovery

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 530
  • Page 531
  • Page 532
  • Page 533
  • Page 534
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 559
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Carlton Fields Logo

A blog focused on reinsurance and arbitration law and practice by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Focused Topics

Hot Topics

Read the results of Artemis’ latest survey of reinsurance market professionals concerning the state of the market and their intentions for 2019.

Recent Updates

Market (1/27/2019)
Articles (1/2/2019)

See our advanced search tips.

Subscribe

If you would like to receive updates to Reinsurance Focus® by email, visit our Subscription page.
© 2008–2025 Carlton Fields, P.A. · Carlton Fields practices law in California as Carlton Fields, LLP · Disclaimers and Conditions of Use

Reinsurance Focus® is a registered service mark of Carlton Fields. All Rights Reserved.

Please send comments and questions to the Reinsurance Focus Administrators

Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please contact us. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites. This site may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions.