01.01.2014 Views

Download PDF - Goodmans

Download PDF - Goodmans

Download PDF - Goodmans

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

State ex enf. McKittrick ex rel. Maloney v. Fidelity Assurance Association, 352<br />

Mo. 725, 179 S.W.2d (1944). In rejecting the Missouri insurance commissioner's<br />

petition for intervention in an action involving an insolvent West Virginia<br />

insurance company, the court noted that the Missouri insurance code did not<br />

require that only the Missouri commissioner should institute a suit for<br />

appointment as receiver of a foreign insurance company, particularly, when<br />

the assets that were deposited by the foreign insurance company were assets<br />

under the control of Missouri and were used as security for annuity contracts.<br />

New York<br />

Rose v. Fid. Mut’l Life Ins. Co., 207 F. Supp. 2d 50 (E.D.N.Y. 2002). The assignees<br />

of a life insurance policy issued by an insurer in rehabilitation in Pennsylvania<br />

were required to pursue an action alleging conversion, negligence, and breach<br />

of contract in Pennsylvania because New York was a reciprocal state under the<br />

UILA and no ancillary receiver had been appointed in New York.<br />

North Carolina Blackwell v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Association, 141 N.C. 117, 53 S.E. 833<br />

(1906). The plaintiff sued a foreign insurer and asked the court to appoint a<br />

receiver in order to take control of the insurer's North Carolina assets, which<br />

plaintiff alleged the insurer was removing from state in order to defraud North<br />

Carolina policyholders. The court held that where only "property" of the<br />

insurer in the state was assessments due from members, no receiver would be<br />

appointed as the assessments were an unattachable debt.<br />

Ohio State ex rel. Bohlinger v. Annat, 60 O.L.A. 453, 123 N.E.2d 71 (1955). The<br />

insurance commissioner has the right, in the exercise of sound discretion, after<br />

the commencement of delinquency proceedings in New York against an<br />

insurer doing business in Ohio, to request a proper court of Ohio for<br />

appointment as ancillary receiver to liquidate the assets of the company in<br />

Ohio if the commissioner found such assets were sufficient to justify the<br />

appointment of the ancillary receiver. If they were not sufficient, the<br />

commissioner could, under the statute, transfer to the domiciliary receiver for<br />

liquidation in New York, the special statutory deposit placed with the insurance<br />

commissioner, subject to the statutory conditions of liquidation of the deposit.<br />

As the commissioner owes a legal duty to Ohio claimants to exercise<br />

discretion within a reasonable time, a failure to request the appointment of an<br />

ancillary receiver or to transfer the statutory deposit constitutes an abuse of<br />

discretion warranting the issuance of mandamus to transfer such deposit to<br />

the domiciliary liquidator for the purpose of liquidating assets of such insurer.<br />

Oklahoma<br />

Clinton v. Hoppedge, 2 F. Supp. 935 (N.E. Okla. 1933). Where foreign insurance<br />

company has been dissolved by its state of domicile, the insurance<br />

commissioner of Oklahoma is required to revoke or suspend authority of<br />

corporation to do business in Oklahoma, and may appoint a receiver over such<br />

company's assets.<br />

Vermont Philip O'Deane v. C & S Wholesale Grocers, Inc., 155 Vt. 651, 584 A.2d 423<br />

(1990). Following the appointment of the Massachusetts Insurance<br />

Commissioner as permanent receiver of American Mutual Liability Insurance<br />

Company, the company moved to dismiss an action against it in Vermont. The<br />

Supreme Court of Vermont denied the motion, finding that Massachusetts<br />

Insurers' Liquidation Act is sufficiently similar to Vermont's counterpart to<br />

qualify Massachusetts as a "reciprocal state," and that Massachusetts law<br />

provided for the appointment of an ancillary receiver in Vermont to process<br />

Vermont claims.<br />

Ancillary Receiver ‐ Filing of Claims

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!