• 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 / Reinsurance Regulation / Reorganization and Liquidation / DELAWARE CHANCERY COURT FINDS THAT ANTI-SUIT INJUNCTION BARS TRUSTEE UNDER REINSURANCE TRUST AGREEMENT FROM PURSUING THIRD-PARTY LITIGATION AGAINST INSOLVENT INSURER

DELAWARE CHANCERY COURT FINDS THAT ANTI-SUIT INJUNCTION BARS TRUSTEE UNDER REINSURANCE TRUST AGREEMENT FROM PURSUING THIRD-PARTY LITIGATION AGAINST INSOLVENT INSURER

August 3, 2016 by Carlton Fields

Freestone Insurance Company is a Delaware-domiciled insurer that has been placed in liquidation. U.S. Bank National Association served as the trustee under a reinsurance trust agreement (the “Trust Agreement”) between Freestone and Companion Property and Casualty Company (“Companion”).  The trust agreement secured a reinsurance arrangement that allowed Freestone to do business through Companion in jurisdictions where Freestone was not admitted to sell insurance.  Under the arrangement, Companion wrote policies as a “fronting insurer” on Freestone’s behalf, and Freestone reinsured the risks under those policies.  The trust agreement required Freestone to place collateral into a trust account for Companion’s benefit, in order to secure Freestone’s reinsurance obligations.  In its capacity as trustee, U.S. Bank had various duties related to the collateral.  After Freestone failed to make certain payments under the reinsurance arrangement, Companion sought to draw down on the collateral, the value of which was insufficient to cover the claims being made under the reinsured policies.  As a result, Companion sued U.S. Bank in federal court in South Carolina for damages, alleging that U.S. Bank breached its obligations as trustee by permitting Freestone to place poor quality collateral in the trust account (the “South Carolina Action”).

As part of Freestone’s liquidation claims process, which is governed by Delaware’s Uniform Insurers Liquidation Act (the “Uniform Act”), U.S. Bank filed certain claims notices against Freestone that relate to the South Carolina Action. U.S. Bank also sought to assert third-party claims against Freestone in the South Carolina Action for contribution and indemnification, and thus filed a motion with the Delaware Chancery Court seeking to lift the anti-suit injunction set forth in the Freestone liquidation Order that barred third-party claims against Freestone other than through the liquidation claims process.  The Chancery Court denied U.S. Bank’s motion, finding that granting such relief would contravene the Uniform Act, interfere with the liquidation claims process and impose unnecessary and unwarranted costs on Freestone and the Delaware Insurance Commissioner as Freestone’s statutory receiver. In the Matter of the Liquidation of Freestone Insurance Company, Case No. 9574-VCL (Del. Chancery Ct. July 7, 2016).

This post written by Rob DiUbaldo.
See our disclaimer.

Filed Under: Reorganization and Liquidation

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.