In a 35 page opinion, a district court judge has entered an Order imposing $1.25 million in sanctions, jointly and severally, upon Zurich American Insurance Company and two law firms, Wiley Rein and Coughlin Duffy, for concealing a 62 page insurance policy that was relevant to insurance coverage for the World Trace Center Towers in the September 11th insurance coverage cases. Although the policy was created after the insurance binders at issue, the court found that “it shows Zurich's knowledge and intent, and how Zurich's customary forms gave meaning to the terms of the policy binder.” A portion of the sanctions, in the amount of $750,000, were imposed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 11, while the remaining $500,000 was imposed as a discovery sanction pursuant to Rule 37, awarding $250,000 in attorneys' fees to each of two Plaintiffs in the actions “to defray the costs they unreasonably incurred in the wasted discovery proceedings.” The result was a total sanctions award of $1.25 million. In re September 11th Liability Insurance Coverage Cases, Case No. 03-332 (USDC SD NY June 18, 2007).
Week's Best Posts
Third Circuit Holds Arbitrator, Not Court, Decides Whether To Consolidate Arbitration Proceedings
In an appeal of a District Court decision discussed in an August 30, 2006 posting in this blog, the Third Circuit recently affirmed a district court’s ruling that an arbitrator, not a court, should decide whether coverage disputes under essentially identical insurance contracts should be arbitrated separately on a contract-by-contract basis or collectively in a consolidated arbitration.
The underlying dispute related to the payment of asbestos claims under reinsurance coverage that Westchester Fire Insurance Company purchased from certain Lloyd’s of London reinsurers. The parties disagreed as to how to characterize the coverage at issue.
The Third Circuit’s decision relied heavily on two recent Supreme Court decisions, namely, Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. and Green Tree Financial Corp. v. Bazzle. In light of this authority, the parties’ agreement to arbitrate their disputes, contractual silence as to the consolidation issue, and the longstanding federal policy favoring arbitration, the Court could see no reason why this procedural issue should not be resolved in arbitration. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s v. Westchester Fire Insurance Company, No. 06-1457 (3d. Cir., June 12, 2007).
Court Rejects Implication of Follow the Settlements Provision into Facultative Reinsurance Certificate
American Re-Insurance provided a facultative reinsurance certificate to Specialty National Insurance (now known as American Motorists Insurance Co.), which had reinsured the Montana Municipal Insurance Authority, a municipal insurance pool that provides insurance to its member entities, including the city of Great Falls, Montana. A dispute arose under the facultative reinsurance when a claim was paid and American Re disagreed as to the interpretation of some of the coverage underlying its reinsurance. Although the facultative certificate did not contain a typical “follow the settlements” provision, American Motorists contended that language in the certificate had the same effect. Interpreting the facultative certificate, the district court disagreed, finding that there was no follow the settlements provision in the certificate. The court therefore granted summary judgment to American Re with respect to a declaratory judgment claim that sought a declaration that American Re was obligated to indemnify American Motorists under the certificate pursuant to the follow the settlements doctrine. American Motorists ins. Co. v. American Re-Insurance Co., Case No. 05-5202 (USDC N.D. Cal. May 29, 2007).
Court Confirms Arbitration Award Over Objection of Moving Party
In an unusual twist in a matter unrelated to reinsurance, an arbitration panel awarded a party in a construction dispute approximately $1.4 million, when the Petitioner sought an award of approximately $6 million, and the Respondent’s expert had estimated the losses at approximately $4 million. The parties each filed separate proceedings directed to the award. When the Petitioner’s request for vacation of the award was denied, the Respondent sought to voluntarily dismiss its request for confirmation under Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41, apparently due to its belief that since the limitation period for confirmation had expired, the award might be unenforceable, and it could try again for a larger award. The district court found the attempted dismissal null and void, and confirmed the award, holding that Rule 41 applied by its terms only to “actions,” and that since requests for confirmation of arbitration awards were motions rather than actions, Rule 41 did not apply. The court proceeded to confirm the award. Alstom Power, Inc. v. S & B Engineers & Constructors, Ltd., Case No. 04-2370 (USDC N.D.Tex. April 30, 2007). The court may have felt that Alstom Power was abusing the Court's process.
Law review articles relating to reinsurance
Three articles were recently published in law reviews and journals relating to reinsurance:
- Health care reform – In The Present and Future of Government-Funded Reinsurance, 51 St. Louis U. L. J. 369 (Winter 2007), John Jacobi, a professor at Seton Hall Law School, contends that government-funded reinsurance could play a valuable role in incremental health care reform.
- Reinsurance intermediaries – In Reinsurance Intermediaries: law and litigation, 29 U. Haw. L. Rev. 59 (Winter 2006), Douglas Richmond, a Senior Vice President with Aon Risk Services, analyzes the duties and potential liabilities of reinsurance intermediaries using fairly traditional agency concepts.
- Hedge funds – In The Utility of Hedge Funds: an alternative to traditional reinsurance, 49 For The Defense 32 (April 2007), practitioners James Somers and Katie Lewis Bordeau offer a general description of the participation of hedge funds in the reinsurance market. Although the title of the article describes hedge funds as an “alternative” to reinsurance, the text really describes hedge funds as a source of capital for vehicles such as side cars.