• 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

District Court refuses to vacate arbitration award

September 7, 2006 by Carlton Fields

In Hilb Rogal & Hobbs Co. v. Golub, Case No. 05-574 (USDC E.D. Va. Aug. 18, 2006), a non-insurance case, a District Court refused to vacate an arbitration award under the manifest disregard of law standard, holding that “[t]he mere fact that an arbitration panel reached a legal conclusion in error is not sufficient for vacatur.”

Filed Under: Confirmation / Vacation of Arbitration Awards

Law journal article addresses hurricane loss reinsurance issues

September 6, 2006 by Carlton Fields

Vincent Vitkowsky, Reinsurance Issues Arising From the 2005 Hurricane Season, 41 Tort Trial & Ins. Prac. L. J. 999 (Spring 2006) – the author addresses issues likely to arise under reinsurance of hurricane losses, including coverage and claim adjustment issues, the follow-the-fortunes doctrine, “occurrence” definitions and aggregation of losses.

Filed Under: Law Review Articles About Reinsurance

Vacation of arbitration awards due to failure to follow arbitration agreement

September 5, 2006 by Carlton Fields

Two opinions recently have addressed the issue of whether an arbitration award should be vacated when the arbitrators fail to follow the arbitration agreement.

  • In Martin v. Wells Fargo Financial, Inc., 2006 WL 2466945, Case No. 05-00003 (9th Cir. Aug. 25, 2006), the Court of Appeals affirmed a District Court decision vacating an arbitration award “because the underlying arbitrations were not conducted in accordance with the terms of the parties' arbitration agreement.”  This unreported opinion is not available on Pacer, and it does not reveal what the Court of Appeals viewed as the deficiencies in the arbitration.

  • In Allstate Ins. Co. v. Superior Court, 2006 WL 2473419 (Cal.Ct.App. Aug. 29, 2006), the Court reversed the vacation of an award on the basis that the panel rendered a “reasoned” award when the arbitration agreement provided that the award should not state reasons.  Instead of vacating the award, the Court directed that the “reasons” be stricken from the confirmed award as surplusage.

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

Alternative Risk Transfer portal

September 4, 2006 by Carlton Fields

Artemis describes iteself as “the Alternative Risk Transfer Portal.” It contains a directory describing numerous alternative risk transfer financing transactions, and provides visitors with an oportunity to subscribe to a news feed of alternative risk transfer deals.

Filed Under: Alternative Risk Transfers, Reinsurance News Links

Disclaimer

September 3, 2006 by Carlton Fields

The materials on this blog are made available by Carlton Fields LLP for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. The transmission and receipt of information contained on or relating to this blog do not form, constitute or create an attorney-client relationship. Persons receiving the information on this blog should not act upon such information without seeking professional legal counsel.

Neither the choice of what material to present in this blog, nor the text of descriptions and comments in blog posts, represent the legal opinions of Carlton Fields or its clients. Blog posts may not be quoted, nor positions in blog posts cited, by lawyers, law firms or others in any context without the express written approval of Carlton Fields.

The materials on this blog represent very selective items of possible interest to those in the reinsurance field, and may not reflect the most current legal developments. Links within the Reinsurance Focus blog may lead to other sites. The Reinsurance Focus blog does not incorporate any materials appearing in such linked sites by reference, and Carlton Fields does not necessarily sponsor, endorse or otherwise approve of such linked materials.

The hiring of an attorney is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

Filed Under: About This Blog

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 648
  • Page 649
  • Page 650
  • Page 651
  • Page 652
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 677
  • 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.