Search Results for: pennsylvania

Pacific Employers Ins. Co. v. AXA Belgium S.A. (E.D. Pa. April 27, 2011)

In 1978, plaintiff and defendant entered into a reinsurance agreement.  Pursuant to the agreement, defendant was obligated to reimburse plaintiff for 5% of a portion of loss and/or loss expense payments made with respect to insurance policies written on plaintiff’s behalf.  At the time the agreement was negotiated and entered into, plaintiff was (and still is) a California domiciled insurance company with its principal place of business in California.  Defendant was (and …

ACE Property & Casualty Insurance Co. v. Global Reinsurance Corp. of America (U.S. District Court, E.D. PA)

In a case removed to federal court from a Pennsylvania state court, a Pennsylvania excess insurer recently filed a claim against a New York reinsurer in a dispute over its obligations under a facultative reinsurance contract.  Unlike a typical treaty reinsurance contract, which reinsures multiple insurance policies written under certain circumstances, a facultative reinsurance contract reinsures a specific insurance policy.  The parties entered into such an agreement to …

Ario v. The Underwriting Members of Syndicate 53 at Lloyd’s

(3^rd Circuit, August 18, 2010)

Two Pennsylvania insurers entered into reinsurance treaties with a Lloyd’s syndicate.  The reinsurance treaties called for arbitration “in accordance with the rules and procedures established by the Uniform Arbitration Act as enacted in Pennsylvania.”   The treaties also provided that the reinsurers will “submit to a Court of competent jurisdiction within the United States,”  but did not waive the right of removal as permitted.

A dispute arose between …

Travelers Insurance v. Insurance Co. of North America (Third Circuit, June 9, 2010)

In Travelers Casualty Co. v. Insurance Co. of North America, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit confronted the difficult problem of how cedents and reinsurers allocate liabilities across 11 years of coverage and three layers of primary and excess insurance.

The original dispute involved Travelers and its insured over payment of claims submitted under 11 years of primary coverage.  Traveler and its insured eventually settled and Travelers allocated the …