A California Court of Appeals, reversing a lower court's decision, has held that the state court could exercise personal jurisdiction over Sedgwick Group Ltd., an English insurance broker which had provided brokerage services for a California excess and surplus lines insurance broker for at least 50 years. The Court found that Sedgwick had “enjoyed decades of profit as a result of purposeful and deliberate business practices aimed at California residents.” In finding the exercise of personal jurisdiction over Sedgwick proper, the Court cited, as being of particular relevance, a Ninth Circuit case that dealt with personal jurisdiction over a London-based insurance broker. Harris Rutsky & Co. Ins. Serv., Inc. v. Bell & Clements, 328 F.3d 1122 (9th Cir. 2003). Swett & Crawford v. Sedgwick Group Ltd., Case No. B183940 (Cal.Ct.App. Oct. 11, 2006).
You are here: Home / Arbitration / Court Decisions / Jurisdiction Issues / Court of Appeal holds that California Court had personal jurisdiction over London insurance broker