<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> 

<rss version="2.0"> 

<channel>

<title>LexisNexis&#174; Mealey's&#8482; Reinsurance Legal News</title>

<link>http://www.lexisnexis.com/mealeys/news.aspx</link>

<description>Headline Reinsurance Legal News from LexisNexis&#174;</description>

<language>en-us</language>

 

<copyright>Copyright 2009</copyright>

<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-13 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 1%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>3rd Circuit Affirms Order Compelling Reinsurer And Retrocessionaire To Arbitrate</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[PHILADELPHIA - A Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Oct. 15 affirmed a lower court's order compelling an arbitration between a reinsurer and its retrocessional reinsurer because the retrocessional reinsurance agreements incorporated the arbitration clauses of certain reinsurance treaties between the reinsurer and its reinsured (Century Indemnity Co. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London, No. 08-2924, 3rd Cir.; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 22619; See 3/20/09, Page 5). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-13 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 1 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-13 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 2%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Wis. Federal Judge Denies Reinsurers' Motion To Reconsider Assigned Arbitrator</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[MADISON, Wis. - A Wisconsin federal judge on Oct. 23 denied a group of reinsurers' motion for reconsideration of her earlier order refusing to disqualify an insurer's appointed arbitrator and her granting of the insurer's motion to appoint a third arbitrator because the reinsurers did not persuade the judge that the earlier opinion was in error or that any grounds exist for relief (Employers Insurance Company of Wausau v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyds of London, et al., No. 09-201, W.D. Wis.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98746). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-13 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 2 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-13 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 3%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Reinsurers Challenge Suit To Disqualify Arbitrator In Illinois Federal Court</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[CHICAGO - In a federal court in Illinois on Oct. 26, a pair of reinsurers moved to dismiss their renisured's complaint alleging that an arbitration panel member is not "disinterested," arguing that the complaint is without merit and that the reinsured has failed to establish the panel member's alleged partiality (Trustmark Insurance Company v. Clarendon National Insurance Company, et al., No. 09-cv-06169, N.D. Ill.; See. 10/16/09, Page 5). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-13 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 3 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-13 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 4%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>In Illinois Federal Court, Reinsurer Says Insurer Waived Right To Recover Funds</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[CHICAGO - A federal judge in Illinois on Oct. 23 held a hearing regarding a reinsurer's motion for summary judgment in which the reinsurer says that an insurer's claim to recover certain monies was waived in a related state court case and that the insurer's allegations should therefore be dismissed (TIG Insurance Company v. Carnforth Limited, No. 08-cv-03618, N.D. Ill.). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-13 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 4 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-13 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 5%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Reinsurer In Illinois Federal Court: Insurer Kept $3.5 Million More Than Agreed</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[CHICAGO - In an Illinois federal court where an insurer accuses a reinsurer of refusing to pay $1.8 million in obligations under certain reinsurance agreements, the reinsurer on Oct. 26 counterclaimed that the insurer retained more than $3.5 million above the amount it was contractually permitted under the agreements (Guarantee Trust Life Insurance Company v. Munich Reinsurance America, Inc., No. 09-cv-05840, N.D. Ill.). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-13 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 5 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-13 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 6%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>3rd Circuit Panel Overturns Dismissal Of Suit Accusing Lender Of Kickback Scheme</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[PHILADELPHIA - A class action lawsuit that accuses a mortgage lender of implementing a mortgage insurance captive reinsurance kickback scheme was revived by a Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Oct. 28 (Mary Alston, et al. v. Countrywide Financial Corp., et al., No. 08-4334, 3rd Cir.; See 9/4/09, Page 8). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-13 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 6 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-13 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 7%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Reinsurer Responds That Insurer Is Not Entitled Relief In Mich. Federal Court</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[DETROIT - After a federal judge in Michigan denied an insurer's claims against an automobile insurance reinsurer because the insurer could not prove that it had paid a premium on a specific vehicle, the reinsurer on Oct. 21 responded to the insurer's motion for relief, saying the insurer is wrong to suggest that it does not have to prove it reinsured the specific vehicle (Old Republic Insurance Company v. Michigan Catastrophic Claims Association, No. 08-12533, E.D. Mich.; See 10/16/09, Page 8). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-13 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 7 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-13 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 8%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Insurer Did Not Assume All Coverage Obligations, 3rd Circuit Panel Says</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[PHILADELPHIA - An asset purchase agreement does not obligate Hartford Fire Insurance Co. to step into the shoes of an insolvent insurer and provide coverage to a former G-I Holdings Inc. officer who is a defendant in three fraudulent conveyance lawsuits, the Third Circuit U.S Court of Appeals affirmed Oct. 26 (G-I Holdings Inc., et al. v. Reliance Insurance Co., et al., No. 07-2510, 3rd Cir.; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 23488). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-13 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 8 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-13 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 9%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Liquidator, Not Association, Owed Reinsurance Proceeds, Judge Concludes</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[PHILADELPHIA - The Mississippi Insurance Guaranty Association (MIGA) is not entitled to $2.5 million in reinsurance proceeds acquired by the now insolvent Legion Insurance Co., a Pennsylvania trial judge ruled Sept. 28, because the reinsurance assets belong to the Legion estate (General Reinsurance Corp. v. American Bankers Insurance Company of Florida, et al., No. 527 MD 2005, Pa. Cmwth.). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-13 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 9 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-13 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 10%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Insurer Says Reinsurer Should Follow Its Fortunes In $35M Asbestos Settlement</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[NEW YORK - An insurer on Oct. 20 sued its reinsurer in a New York federal court over alleged obligations regarding a $35 million settlement of certain asbestos-related claims against an insolvent insulation products distributor and installer and asked the court for a declaration that the reinsurer must follow the fortunes of the insurer (Republic Indemnity Company of America v. Transatlantic Reinsurance Company, No. 09-cv-08871, S.D. N.Y.). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-13 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 10 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-13 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 11%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Judge Remands Action Against Insolvent Crop Insurance Company</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[OMAHA, Neb. - A Nebraska federal judge on Oct. 26 denied a liquidator's motion to dismiss a reinsurer's lawsuit seeking unpaid reinsurance premiums against an insolvent crop insurer and instead remanded the case to the state court's liquidation proceeding (Granite Reinsurance Co. Ltd. v. Ann M. Frohman, Nebraska director of insurance in her capacity as liquidator of American Growers Insurance Co., No. 08-410, D. Neb.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72294). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-13 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 11 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-13 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 12%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Hurricane Rita Case Reinsurers Tell Texas Federal Court Of Related Litigation</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[HOUSTON - A group of insurers embroiled in a dispute with a chemical plant operator and its captive insurer over damage to the chemical plant caused by Hurricane Rita notified a Texas federal court on Oct. 26 of related litigation that was stayed when the parties agreed to arbitrate their disputes (Arch Reinsurance of Nebraska, et al. v. Huntsman Corporation, et al., No. 09-cv-02404, S.D. Texas; See 9/18/09, Page 13). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-13 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 12 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-13 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 13%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Reinsurer Had Right To Pursue Insolvent Insurer's Overpayments, Judge Says</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[SPOKANE, Wash. - Through an assignment agreement, a reinsurer had the right to pursue recovery of alleged overpayments made by an insolvent crop insurer, a Washington federal judge found Sept. 30 (Lynn Olsen d.b.a. Olsen Agriprises and Carr Farms LLC v. United States of America, et al., Nos. 08-5012 &amp; 08-5013, E.D. Wash.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93614). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-13 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 13 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-13 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 14%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Judge Grants Reinsurers' Motion To Dismiss Previously Dismissed Counterclaims</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[NEW YORK - A federal judge in New York on Oct. 14 granted a pair of reinsurers' motion to dismiss a number of counterclaims brought in an amended answer by the alleged guarantor of certain reinsurance obligations and said that although the counterclaims had been dismissed in an earlier order and were meant only to preserve the right to appeal, they should be dismissed so they could not be misconstrued as an attempt to relitigate (Everest National Insurance Company, et al. v. Robert Sutton, et al., No. 07-cv-00722, D. N.J.; See 8/7/09, Page 9). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-13 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 14 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-13 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 15%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Ill. Federal Judge Dismisses Reinsurer And Reinsured's Commutation Dispute</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[CHICAGO - A federal judge in Illinois on Oct. 14 issued an agreed order of dismissal of an action between a reinsurer and its reinsured regarding the parties' dispute over whether a commutation and release agreement terminating certain reinsurance agreements covers certain other reinsurance contracts purchased by the reinsured from a pair of nonparty insurers (Continental Casualty Co. and Continental Insurance Co. v. Commercial Risk Re-Insurance Co., et al., No. 07-C-6912, N.D. Ill.; See 5/1/09, Page 8). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-13 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 15 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>

<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-12 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 1%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>2nd Circuit Panel Remands $34M Reinsurance Case, Says Record Not Complete</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[NEW YORK - In a summary order issued Oct. 6, a Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel remanded a case involving a $34 million jury award between a group of insurers and a German reinsurer and mandated that the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York commence proceedings to create a record regarding the reinsurer's claim that the insurers waived their right to arbitrate (AXA Versicherung AG, on its own behalf and as successor in interest to Albingia Versicherungs AG v. New Hampshire Insurance Co., et al., No. 08-2521, 2nd Cir.; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 21923). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-12 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 1 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-12 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 2%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Reinsured Says Arbitrator Is Not 'Disinterested,' Should Be Disqualified</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[CHICAGO - On Oct. 2, a reinsured sued its reinsurer in an Illinois federal court, asking the court to disqualify the reinsurer's arbitrator because she is allegedly not "disinterested" as required by a certain arbitration agreement (Trustmark Insurance Company v. Clarendon National Insurance Company, et al., No. 09-cv-06169, N.D. Ill.). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-12 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 2 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-12 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 3%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Reinsurer Appeals Pa. Federal Judge's Denial Of $6 Million Arbitration Award</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[PHILADELPHIA - A reinsurer on Oct. 9 filed a notice in a Pennsylvania federal court that it had appealed to the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals a judge's denial of the reinsurer's motion to confirm a $6 million arbitration award after the judge on Oct. 2 had also denied the reinsurer's motion to remand the dispute to the arbitration panel (PMA Capital Insurance Co., et al. v. Platinum Underwriters Bermuda, Ltd., No. 09-mc-0084, E.D. Pa.; See 10/2/09, Page 4). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-12 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 3 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-12 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 4%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>N.Y. Panel: Burden Of Proof Met In Alleged Reinsurance Treaty Mutual Mistake</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[NEW YORK - A New York appeals panel on Oct. 1 reversed a lower court dismissal of an insurer's reformation claims against a reinsurer and held that the insurer had met its burden of proof regarding an alleged mutual mistake in a series of reinsurance agreements (Gulf Insurance Company v. Transatlantic Reinsurance Company, et al., No. 3846 601602/03 601077/04, N.Y. App. Div., 1st Dept.; 2009 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6643). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-12 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 4 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-12 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 5%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Mich. Federal Judge: Alleged Reinsured Failed To Show Relevant Premium Payments</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[DETROIT - After finding that an insurer could not show that it paid certain premiums to a statutorily created reinsurance association, a federal judge in Michigan on Sept. 29 granted summary judgment to the reinsurance pool against the insurer's allegation that the pool is obligated to indemnify it for certain claims (Old Republic Insurance Company v. Michigan Catastrophic Claims Association, No. 08-12533, E.D. Mich.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89799). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-12 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 5 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-12 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 6%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Insurer Asks Illinois Federal Court To Enforce $1.8M Reinsurance Dispute</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[CHICAGO - An insurer on Sept. 18 accused its reinsurer in an Illinois federal court of refusing to pay $1.8 million in cash calls and quota share obligations under a reinsurance agreement (Guarantee Trust Life Insurance Company v. Munich Reinsurance America, Inc., No. 09-cv-05840, N.D. Ill.). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-12 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 6 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-12 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 7%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Counterclaims Filed In Ill. Federal Court Over Reinsurance Pool's Fraud Case</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[CHICAGO - A group of insurers filed their amended counterclaims in an Illinois federal court on Oct. 7 after their motion to realign the action regarding fraud claims originally brought by a reinsurance pool was denied on their argument that they should be named as plaintiff in the case now that the court has found that the pool has no standing (National Council on Compensation Insurance Inc. v. American International Group Inc., et al., No. 07-cv-2898, N.D. Ill.; See 9/4/09, Page 4). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-12 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 7 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-12 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 8%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Reinsurer, Insurer Agree, Ask Judge To Drop Motion To Dismiss Contribution Claim</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[LOS ANGELES - A reinsurer and an insurer on Oct. 7 notified a federal judge in California that they have reached an agreement in a dispute regarding certain liabilities for losses payable under a policy written by an insolvent insurer (Clarendon National Insurance Company v. Arrowood Surplus Lines Insurance Co., fka Royal Surplus Lines Insurance Company, No. 09-cv-05584, C.D. Calif.; See 10/2/09, Page 13). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-12 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 8 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-12 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 9%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Reinsurer In Receivership Not Directly Liable For Claims, Panel Determines</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[KANSAS CITY, Mo. - Because a reinsurance agreement did not make Transit Casualty Co. in receivership directly liable to an insurance company's successor, a Missouri appeals panel on Sept. 29 upheld a finding that the successor insurer's claims against the Transit receivership estate are Class 5 general creditor claims and not Class 3 policy claims (J.C. Penney Life Insurance Co. v. Transit Casualty Co. in receivership, No. WD69819, W.D. Mo. App.; 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1378). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-12 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 9 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-12 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 10%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Insurer Had No Cognizable Property Right In Sale Of Policies, Panel Determines</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Oct. 1 affirmed the dismissal of an insurer's Fifth Amendment takings action because the insurer did not have a cognizable property interest in the ability to freely transfer its insolvent subsidiary's federally reinsured crop insurance policies. Thus, there was no cognizable property interest that could be taken when a government agency rejected a proposed sale of the policies (Acceptance Insurance Cos. Inc. v. United States, No. 2009-5015, U.S. Fed. Cir.; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 21549; See 10/8/08, Page 8). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-12 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 10 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-12 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 11%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>New York Justice Dismisses A Portion Of Reinsurers' Claims Against Brokers</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[NEW YORK - A New York County Supreme Court justice on Sept. 29 granted a portion of a motion to dismiss filed by a group of insurance brokers after determining that a number of investors in syndicates that are reinsurance underwriters through the Lloyd's of London insurance market that sued them released the brokers from liability for losses in connection with asbestos claims under policies brokered by the defendants (George Aldrich, et al. v. Marsh &amp; McLennan Co. Inc., et al., No. 605336/99, N.Y. Sup., New York Co.; 2009 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2713). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-12 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 11 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-12 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 12%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>News From The LexisNexis Insurance Law Center</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[[Editor's Note: The following items of interest appeared recently on the LexisNexis Insurance Law Center. Devoted to insurance litigation and the insurance industry, the Insurance Law Center is where you can connect with other insurance professionals to discuss the hottest issues. Become a regular contributor. Visit the center on the open Web for insurance-related headlines, discussion, expert commentary and more at: http://law.lexisnexis.com/practiceareas/insurance.] 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-12 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 12 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>

<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-11 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 1%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Pennsylvania Federal Judge Says $6M Award To Reinsurer Is Completely Irrational</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[PHILADELPHIA - In vacating a $6 million arbitration award to a reinsurer on Sept. 17, a federal judge in Pennsylvania held that the award was completely irrational because it could not be derived from the underlying reinsurance agreement or from the parties' submissions (PMA Capital Insurance Co., et al. v. Platinum Underwriters Bermuda, Ltd., No. 09-mc-0084, E.D. Pa.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85046). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-11 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 1 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-11 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 2%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Ill. Federal Judge: Arbitration Panel Did Not Exceed Authority In Awarding Fees</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[CHICAGO - A federal judge in Illinois on Sept. 24 confirmed an arbitration panel's award, including the award of attorney fees to a reinsurer regarding litigation over the appointment of members of the panel, holding that the panel had not exceeded its authority (Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London, v. Argonaut Insurance Company, No. 04. Cv-05852, N.D. Ill.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87827). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-11 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 2 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-11 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 3%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Reinsurer Opposes Motion To Enjoin Arbitration In Pennsylvania Federal Court</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[PHILADELPHIA - In a federal court in Pennsylvania, a reinsurer on Sept. 22 filed under seal its brief in opposition to an insurer's motion to enjoin an arbitration related to a dispute over the confirmation of another arbitration award between the parties to a contingency first excess of loss cover reinsurance agreement from the 1960s and 1970s (Century Indemnity Company successor to Insurance Company of North America v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London, No. 08-mc-00219, E.D. Pa.). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-11 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 3 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-11 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 4%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Reinsurers, Insurers Spar Over Umpire Candidates In Illinois Federal Court</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[CHICAGO - In a federal court in Illinois, a pair of reinsurers on Sept. 28 replied to a pair of insurers' claim that their arbitration umpire candidates are unsuitable by saying they have nominated three highly qualified and impartial candidates to serve as the neutral umpire (American Motorist Insurance Company, et al. v. Employers Insurance Company of Wausau, No. 09-cv-04752, N.D. Ill.; See 8/21/09, Page 7). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-11 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 4 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-11 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 5%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Federal Judge In Texas: Reinsurance Broker Failed To Show Likeliness Of Success</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[DALLAS - A federal judge in Texas on Sept. 28 denied a reinsurance broker's request for preliminary injunctive relief against a reinsured's suit in a state court, noting that the broker had failed to show a likelihood of success on the merits of its claims that the state case was a relitigation of an earlier federal case (Aon Re Inc. v. TIG Insurance Company, 09-cv-00300, N.D. Texas; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89249; See 6/5/09, Page 6). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-11 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 5 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-11 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 6%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Australian Justice Splits $5.98M Judgment Between 2 Lloyd's Syndicate Years</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[SYDNEY, Australia - A New South Wales Supreme Court justice on Sept. 11 clarified an earlier order by defining which of two groups of underwriters is ordered to pay which portion of a $5.98 million-plus-interest judgment to a reinsurer's liquidator (New Cap Reinsurance Corporation Ltd. v. A E Grant &amp; Ors, Lloyd's Syndicate No 991, No. 2009 NSWSC 950, New South Wales Sup.; See 7/24/09, Page 11). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-11 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 6 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-11 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 7%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Reinsurer Argues In Conn. Federal Court That Order Conflicts With Earlier Ruling</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[NEW HAVEN, Conn. - A fronting reinsurer on Sept. 29 replied in further support of its motion for reconsideration of a Connecticut federal judge's order, arguing that the order is in conflict with a previous order clarifying an arbitration panel's definition of a party's responsibility under the agreement (Arrowood Indemnity Company v. Trustmark Insurance Company, No. 03-cv-01000, D. Conn.; See. 8/21/09, Page 11). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-11 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 7 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-11 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 8%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Reinsurer In Receivership Not Directly Liable For Claims, Panel Determines</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[KANSAS CITY, Mo. - Because a reinsurance agreement did not make Transit Casualty Co. in receivership directly liable to an insurance company's successor, a Missouri appeals panel on Sept. 29 upheld a finding that the successor insurer's claims against the Transit receivership estate are Class 5 general creditor claims and not Class 3 policy claims (J.C. Penney Life Insurance Co. v. Transit Casualty Co. in receivership, No. WD69819, W.D. Mo. App.; 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1378). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-11 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 8 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-11 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 9%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Insurer Opposes Equitable Contribution Claim Dismissal In Calif. Federal Court</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[LOS ANGELES - In a federal court in California, an insurer on Sept. 23 opposed a reinsurer's motion to dismiss an equitable contribution claim, arguing that the claim is essentially a permissive cross-complaint with respect to the underlying action and that if the motion is granted, it would serve only to proliferate unnecessary court filings (Clarendon National Insurance Company v. Arrowood Surplus Lines Insurance Co, fka Royal Surplus Lines Insurance Company, No. 09-cv-05584, C.D. Calif.). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-11 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 9 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-11 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 10%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>Reinsurer Voluntarily Dismisses $85 Million Line Of Credit Dispute</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[CHARLOTTE, N.C. - A reinsurer on Sept. 9 voluntarily dismissed its action in a North Carolina federal court in which it had asked the court to compel the German successor in interest to a number of retrocessionaires to arbitrate a dispute regarding the German companies' alleged refusal to increase a losses and reserves line of credit to more than $85 million (Transamerica Life Insurance Company v. SCOR Ruckversicherung [Deutschland] AG, No. 09-cv-00060, W.D. N.C.: See 4/3/09, Page 9). 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-11 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 10 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>
 
<item>
<link>http://www.mealeysonline.com/mealey/ppv/articleSearch.do?searchTerm=%22%2020-11 Mealeys Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 11%20(2009)%20%22&amp;pageLimit=10&amp;pageNumber=0&amp;publication=All+Mealey+Publications%3BMEALEY%3BMEALEY&amp;relativeDateValue=NONE&amp;fromDate=&amp;toDate=&amp;loc=mealeysrss</link>
<title>News From The LexisNexis Insurance Law Center</title>
<description>
<![CDATA[[Editor's Note: The following items of interest appeared recently on the LexisNexis Insurance Law Center. Devoted to insurance litigation and the insurance industry, the Insurance Law Center is where you can connect with other insurance professionals to discuss the hottest issues. Become a regular contributor. Visit the center on the open Web for insurance-related headlines, discussion, expert commentary and more at: http://law.lexisnexis.com/practiceareas/insurance] Seacor Marine, LLC v. Cummins Mid-South, Inc. 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67133 [lexis.com] (E.D. La., July 31, 2009) If Party Is Not Listed As An Additional Insured On A Policy It Is Not An Additional Insured Even where the policyholder had a contractual duty to add another party as an additional insured, if the actual insurance policy does not extend additional insured coverage, it is not an additional insured. . . . 
<a href="http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&amp;keyenum=25271&amp;keytnum=0&amp;searchtype=get&amp;search=20-11 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Reinsurance 11 (2009)&amp;view=full&amp;ORIGINATION_CODE=00144" target="_blank">Full story on lexis.com</a>]]>
</description>
</item>

</channel>

</rss> 

