Download PDF - Goodmans

secure a court‐ordered receivership or other formal remedies available
through the court order. However, the granting of receivership is an extreme
remedy which should not be used unless other less drastic remedies are shown
to be inadequate. If the Commissioner chooses not to pursue any of the
summary remedies, or seeks to move from a summary remedy to a full courtordered
receivership, he must show that the more limited statutory remedies
would be inadequate to address the insurer's problem.
Hawaii
Illinois
Villagonza v. Hawaii Ins. Guaranty Assn., 772 P.2d 1193, 70 Haw. 406 (1989). The
Hawaii Supreme Court held that the Hawaii Insurance Guaranty Association
(HIGA) was not obligated to pay the claims of an insolvent California insurer
which transacted insurance in Hawaii only on a surplus line basis. The court
analyzed the provisions of the guaranty association act and concluded that it
applied only to insurers licensed in Hawaii.
In re Liquidation of Legion Indemnity Corp., 2007 WL 942356 (Ill. App. Ct. Mar.
29 2007) – Two insurers are in privity for purpose of res judicata where they
contract to report a single cession statement as a single entity to reinsurer.
Larson v. Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. of California, 373 Ill. 614 (1940), cert denied 61
S. Ct. 137, 311 U.S. 698, 85 L. Ed. 452. Illinois policyholders of a California
insurance company were bound by a California court order declaring the
company insolvent and adopting a plan of rehabilitation and reinsurance.
Policyholders' claims of violation of the due process, equal protection and
contract clauses of the Federal Constitution were defeated under the doctrine
of class representation.
Indiana Gibralter Mutual Insurance Company v. Hoosier Insurance Company, 486
N.E.2d (Ind. App. 1985). Indiana Code §27‐9‐2‐3, guarding the confidentiality of
all documents, files and papers which concern or are part of the record of an
insurance company delinquency proceeding, does not impliedly eliminate the
defense of truth to a libel action between two insurance companies.
New Jersey
Matter of Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Co., 258 N.J. Super. 356 (App. Div.
1992). The purpose of the Uniform Insurers' Liquidation Act at N.J.S.A. 17B:32‐1
et seq. [amended pursuant to P.L. 1992, c.65, approved July 28, 1992] is to
provide for a uniform, orderly and equitable method of making and processing
claims against financially troubled insurers, to provide for fair procedures for
rehabilitating the business of such insurers and, if necessary, distributing their
assets. The Act should be interpreted to provide the broadest protection to
the public, claimants and beneficiaries consistent with the Act's purposes.
New York Corcoran v. Antigua and Barbuda Permanent Mission, No. 89 Civ. 0047, 1990
U.S. Dist. Lexis 3936 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 10, 1990). The Liquidator of Union
Indemnity Insurance Company brought an action for specific performance of
an indemnity agreement against Antigua's Permanent Representative to the
United Nations. Antigua moved to dismiss under the Foreign Sovereign
Immunities Act on the grounds that its representative's actions were made in
his individual, not official, capacity. The Court held that there were issues of
fact concerning the representative's apparent agency authority to bind
Antigua. Antigua conceded that if the representative had had authority,
Antigua would have waived its sovereign immunity under the commercial
activity exception to the FSIA. The Court therefore denied the motion to
dismiss, and ordered the parties to proceed with discovery on the agency
issue.