The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York recently held that an arbitrator was not precluded by the doctrine of functus officio from modifying his findings regarding a prior award in a dispute between parties, since that award did not resolve the question of damages related to a particular issue and thus was not “final.”


Read More Federal Court Confirms Arbitration Award, Finding that Arbitrator did not Exceed His Powers in Amending a Portion of a Prior Award Regarding a Reinsurer’s Liability for Payments Made by its Cedent

In a recently released revenue ruling, the IRS has established procedures for determining if insurance written through protected cell companies constitutes insurance for federal income tax purposes.  This is a result of the previously issued Notice 2005-49, in which the IRS requested comments from the public on this issue.  Concurrently, the IRS issued Notice 2008-19, in which it is requesting comments from the public on guidance regarding the issues that arise if such arrangements actually do constitute insurance. 
Read More IRS Requests Comments on a Revenue Ruling Concerning Taxation of Protected Cell Captive Arrangements

HM Treasury is expected to publish a consultation paper shortly (in the next few weeks) on updating Lloyd’s corporate governance procedures and other matters concerning the efficient operation of Lloyd’s. The consultation period will last 3 months. 
Read More UK: Forthcoming Consultation on Lloyd’s Act Amendments Expected to Allow Third Term for Chairman of Lloyd’s, Lord Levene

On Thursday, the Florida House Committee unanimously passed a bill backed by Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink requiring insurer’s that buy into the state’s catastrophe fund to purchase reinsurance from the private market.  It was estimated that the bill, which was backed by Republican’s such as Ron Reagan, could inject as much as $3 billion of limits back to the private reinsurance market. 
Read More Florida House Committee Passes Legislation to Expand Private Reinsurance Market

A New York state appellate court recently held that an insured’s failure to notify its insurer of an occurrence and the possibility of a claim until eight months after an accident breached the notice requirement of the liability policy in question. 


Read More New York Appellate Court: Eight Month Delay in Notice of Occurrence Breached Policy Condition Precedent Even Without Showing of Prejudice

A New York appellate court recently held that factual issues should have precluded summary judgment for a subcontractor and its insurer concerning whether they were obligated to provide defense and indemnification to a general contractor pursuant to the subcontract entered into between the general contractor and subcontractor. 


Read More New York Appellate Court: Question of Fact Concerning Additional Insured Obligations Precludes Summary Judgment

A New York appellate court recently held that a coverage action was not rendered merely “academic” by the dismissal of the underlying property damage action because the insured continued to have a claim for litigation expenses incurred in defense of the underlying action. 
Read More New York Appellate Court: Insurer Not Entitled to Dismissal of Coverage Action Just Because Underlying Suit Is Dismissed

In a recent decision from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle, Heights at Issaquah Ridge Owners Association v. Steadfast Ins. Co., Case No. C07-1045RSM (W.D.Wa. Dec. 13, 2007), the court denied the plaintiff’s motion to compel an insurer to produce loss reserve information because the plaintiff did not assert how such information would be relevant to its bad faith claim. 


Read More Court Rules That Reserve Information and Reinsurance Communications Are Not Relevant to Bad Faith and Consumer Protection Claims

The New York Appellate Division, First Department, recently denied a reinsurer’s motion for summary judgment, finding that an issue of fact existed as to whether a cedent’s allocation of an underlying claim to a reinsured policy was made in bad faith and constituted an ex gratia payment. 


Read More New York Court Finds That a Factual Issue Exists as to Whether a Cedent’s Allocation was in Bad Faith and Constitutes an Ex Gratia Payment

In a 9 – 0 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court decided on Wednesday of this week that individual participants in 401(k) retirement plans can sue plan fiduciaries to recover losses that result from mishandling of their individual retirement accounts.  Until the decision in LaRue v. DeWolff, Boberg & Associates, Inc., No. 06-856, (Feb. 20, 2008) courts and commentators disagreed over whether an individual account holder could bring an ERISA action against plan fiduciaries or whether only the plan itself had standing to bring those lawsuits. 


Read More Supreme Court’s Decision in LaRue v. DeWolff, Boberg & Associates, Inc. Could Lead to an Increase in Individual Account Holder 401(k) Litigation