• 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 / Reinsurance Claims / PENNSYLVANIA APPELLATE COURT DENIES PETITION TO TRANSFER STRUCTURED SETTLEMENT INVOLVING LHWCA

PENNSYLVANIA APPELLATE COURT DENIES PETITION TO TRANSFER STRUCTURED SETTLEMENT INVOLVING LHWCA

March 29, 2017 by John Pitblado

Relying on Federal Court precedent, a Pennsylvania intermediate appellate court resolved whether the plain language of Section 916 of the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (“LHWCA”) prohibits the assignment of benefits where the employer/insured entered into a reinsurance agreement with another insurer to pay the structured settlement payments. “In other words, a determination must be made as to whether [the employee’s] claim under the LHWCA was resolved when the Reinsurance Agreement was entered, and whether the settlement payouts are being made to him pursuant to a contract where he is a third party beneficiary.”

The Court ultimately reversed the lower court’s decision which had permitted the transfer, holding “it would be absurd to allow a party, who expressly settled a LHWCA claim, to avoid the anti-assignment clause of the LHWCA merely by engaging in the common practice of purchasing an annuity or having a separate insurance company pay the structured settlement payments …. [and] to utilize the [petitioner’s] interpretation of Section 916 would effectively render the LHWCA inapplicable, as any form of reinsurance agreement or annuity would be considered a payment of the outstanding claim.”

In re: C. Dwyer, No. 149 WDA 2016 (Sup. Ct. Pa. January 27. 2017)

This post written by Nora A. Valenza-Frost.

See our disclaimer.

Filed Under: Reinsurance Claims

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.