Insurance Law: Cases
Sponsored Links
- Atherton v. Federal Deposit Insur. Corp State law sets the standard of conduct for officers and directors of federally insured savings institutions as long as the state standard (i.e. simple negligence) is stricter than that of section 1821(k). The federal statute nonetheless sets a "gross negligence" floor, which applies as a substitute for state standards that are more relaxed
- Howard Delivery Service v. Zurich American Insurance Company Creditor may not seek priority status in a bankruptcy case to recover unpaid premiums owed for legally-required workers' compensation insurance.
- Humana Inc. v. Forsyth Plaintiffs may use RICO (anti-racketeering law) to sue health insurers over alleged fraud in federal court.
- Kentucky Assoc. of Health Plans, Inc. v. Miller ERISA does not preempt Kentucky's "Any Willing Provider" statutes where that statutes are "laws…which regulate insurance" and are specifically directed toward entities engaged in insurance.
- Mutual Life Ins. v. Haslip Punitive award damages in case where jury found insurance agent liable for fraud did not violate Due Process of 14th Amendment.
- Quackenbush v. Allstate Insurance In a case where CA Insurance Commissioner sought to remand the case to state court, arguing that the court should abstain from hearing the case, under Burford v. Sun Oil Co., because its resolution might interfere with California's regulation of insurance insolvencies and liquidations, Court held that the abstention-based remand order is appealable because the "remand order here falls within that narrow class of collateral orders that are immediately appealable" and Burford is not applicable here.
- UNUM Life Ins. Co. of America v. Ward California's agency rule is preempted by ERISA; but CA's notice-prejudice rule is not preempted by ERISA because it is a law that "regulates…insurance" and "complements rather than contradicts" ERISA.
- Ward v. Durham Life Knowledge of an agent is assumed to be the knowledge of the insurer, unless evidence of collusion with agent.
- Waxse v. Reserve Life Applicant is not required to volunteer information; Insurer should have asked specific questions in order to challenge
- Wengler v. Druggists Mutual Ins. Co. State compensation law denying a widower benefits on his wife's work-related death unless he either proves mental or physical incapacitation or dependence on his wife's earnings, but granting a widow death benefits without her having to prove dependence on her husband's earnings, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Ads by FindLaw