• 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 / Arbitration / Court Decisions / DISTRICT COURT DENIES CHARTIS’ MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION PENDING COURT HEARING AS TO WHETHER ARBITRATION IS MANDATORY

DISTRICT COURT DENIES CHARTIS’ MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION PENDING COURT HEARING AS TO WHETHER ARBITRATION IS MANDATORY

June 2, 2011 by Carlton Fields

On April 5, the US District Court for the District of Colorado granted in part and denied in part defendant American International Special Lines’ (now known as Chartis Specialty Insurance Company) Motion to Compel Arbitration, Stay Proceeding, and to Dismiss. The suit arises out of an insurance policy, containing an arbitration clause, relating to costs associated with a cleanup at Lowry Air Force Base in Colorado. The Court denied Chartis’ Motion to Compel Arbitration and to Stay the Proceedings, finding that language in the arbitration clause was ambiguous. Specifically, the Court found that the clause’s operative language (stating that a dispute “may be submitted” to arbitration and that any party “may commence such arbitration”) did not clearly establish whether arbitration was permissive or mandatory. Accordingly, if Chartis wishes to compel arbitration, it must carry its burden to establish that arbitration is mandatory through a factual determination on the issue by the court. Finally, the Court granted Chartis’ Motion to Dismiss on Lowry’s claim for breach of fiduciary duty, finding there was no fiduciary or quasi-fiduciary relationship between insured and insurer in a first-party context. Lowry Assumption, LLC v. Am. Int’l Specialty Lines Ins. Co., Case No. 10-02901 (D. Colo. Apr. 5, 2011).

This post written by John Black.

Filed Under: Arbitration / Court Decisions

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.