About Banner

Insurance & Reinsurance Litigation

Sign Up for Publications

Quinn Emanuel’s Insurance and Reinsurance Litigation Group has been uniformly recognized as one of the premier practice groups in the country by several leading publications. The group is known for representing insurance companies in the most challenging of cases, typically involving high-value coverage and bad faith disputes or cutting-edge legal issues of significance to the industry. Our expertise spans all areas of importance to the industry, including property and casualty, directors and officers (“D&O”), life, mortgage, and business interruption insurance disputes, as well as matters involving bad faith, reinsurance, complex financial products, and managing general agency agreements.

Despite being formed only eleven years ago, the group has represented a broad array of entities in the insurance industry, including American International Group (“AIG”), Aon PLC, National Indemnity Co., Infrassure Ltd., Allied World Assurance Co., Great American Insurance Group, United Guaranty Insurance Co., AXA Corporate Solutions, Towers Watson, National General Insurance Group, Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., Various Syndicates at Lloyd’s of London, MBIA, OneBeacon America, HDI-Gerling, Resolute Ltd., CNA, MassMutual, Excess Treaty Management Corp., Syncora Guaranty, Allstate Insurance Co., Ambac Assurance Co., and The Excess Casualty Reinsurance Association.

The group combines deep industry knowledge with true top-flight trial capabilities and one of the top appellate practices in the nation. Group leader, Michael Carlinsky, has consistently been ranked among the top litigators in the United States by multiple leading global publications. Most recently, Benchmark Litigation named Mr. Carlinsky “General Commercial Litigator of the Year” for 2022, and the New York Law Journal named him one of three Finalists for 2022 “Lawyer of the Year.” Chambers USA 2021 to 2023 ranks him Band 1 for Commercial Litigation and Band 2 for National Trial Lawyers, describing him as “a tremendous litigator” who is “fearless and confident,” and whose “advice is incredibly thoughtful and well developed.” Mr. Carlinsky has been named one of the “Top 100 Trial Lawyers in America” every year since 2015 by Benchmark Litigation, which referred to him as “Quinn’s big gun,” and has received awards from numerous other legal publications. Appellate matters are led by Kathleen Sullivan, a top appellate practitioner in the nation and former dean of Stanford Law School.

The firm and many of its attorneys are also active members of the AIDA Insurance and Reinsurance Society, also known as ARIAS. Our collective experience has helped us create a valuable database of knowledge with a broad range of arbitrators both inside and outside the United States.


Recent Representations

  • In the Matter of Vesttoo Ltd. (D. Del. Bankr.): After the discovery of a wide-ranging fraud committed by Israeli insurance fintech Vesttoo Ltd., Quinn Emanuel—on behalf of Aon PLC subsidiary White Rock Insurance (SAC) Ltd.—filed and won a temporary restraining order from the Southern District of New York, instituting an immediate asset freeze over Vesttoo’s worldwide assets. White Rock, a Bermudan segregated accounts company, was the fronting reinsurer on over $2.2 billion of transactions originated by Vesttoo. The TRO was in aid of arbitrations also filed by Quinn Emanuel (with co-counsel in Bermuda), which sought the return of over $134 million in payments made to Vesttoo by White Rock on behalf of clients. In response to that filing, Vesttoo and 47 of its subsidiaries filed for bankruptcy in the District of Delaware. In that proceeding, the Vesttoo debtors have admitted to a “fraudulent scheme” that involved at least two of Vesttoo’s founders, three other Vesttoo executives, individuals at Vesttoo’s so-called investors, and employees of China Construction Bank and Standard Chartered Bank. White Rock’s efforts to recover funds, and the investigation into Vesttoo’s fraud, are ongoing.
  • AP Holdings Two LLC, et al. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London, et al. (N.Y. Sup. Ct.): We represent AIG Property Casualty Company in a high-profile, ongoing lawsuit in New York Supreme Court brought by affiliates of Ronald Perelman, who are suing AIG and other insurers for almost $500 million in coverage in relation to five high-value, blue-chip artworks that they allege were damaged in a fire in Perelman’s Hamptons home.
  • Hilton Worldwide Holdings, Inc. Cases (Nev. and Va.): Quinn Emanuel represents AIG affiliate, Lexington Insurance Company, in a high-profile COVID-19 business interruption case brought by Hilton Worldwide Holdings, Inc. in Nevada state court and a parallel proceeding in Virginia. Hilton alleges hundreds of millions of dollars in business interruption losses resulting from hotel booking cancellations, refunded and decreased stays, and other such losses attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic and related government interventions. Hilton claims it is entitled to reimbursement under various coverage provisions in its “all risk” property insurance policy, all of which require “direct physical loss or damage” to its property to trigger coverage. The insurers in this matter are currently appealing an interlocutory order denying their motion to dismiss and are in the middle of discovery. A trial date is set for 2025.
  • Siebel v. AIG (S.D.N.Y.): We are defending AIG and its affiliate, National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA, against a putative class action in the Southern District of New York that was brought on behalf of purchasers of travel insurance whose trips were canceled prior to departure. The plaintiff claims that he and the putative class are entitled to partial refunds of premiums they paid that are allegedly attributable to coverages that can only arise “post-departure.” We moved to dismiss the complaint because, among other reasons, the insurance policies at issue expressly state that no premium refunds are available after a 15-day period after purchase, and that period has already lapsed. The court granted our motion to dismiss with prejudice.
  • Travel Guard Group, Inc. Cases (N.D. Cal. and W.D. Wa.): The firm is defending AIG and several affiliates against putative class action lawsuits in the Northern District of California and the Western District of Washington brought by purchasers of travel insurance. In each case, the plaintiffs allege that AIG and its affiliates wrongfully collected “hidden” charges for assistance services on top of the travel insurance premiums they charged, in violation of state consumer protection laws.
  • Westminster American Insurance v. Security National Insurance Co. (E.D. Pa.): We, along with co-counsel, represent Security National Insurance Co. (“SNIC”) in connection with a coverage dispute filed against it in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in 2019. This dispute arose after SNIC concluded that, based on its commercial general liability policy issued to contractor AM Marlin Construction LLC, coverage did not extend to two construction workers injured in an accident that took place in the building where AM Marlin had been retained for repair work. The building owner’s insurer, the injured workers, and the wife of one of them challenged SNIC’s coverage position in court. In August 2021, the court found that SNIC owed no coverage and granted SNIC’s motion to dismiss the case. However, the Third Circuit disagreed and sent the matter back to the district court. A few weeks later, we requested that the court address the remaining arguments included in SNIC’s motion to dismiss, which resulted in a full dismissal of the case, for a second time. This latest decision is currently under appeal.
  • Alesco Preferred Funding VIII, Ltd. v. ACP Re, Ltd. (N.Y. Sup. Ct.): Quinn Emanuel represents certain individuals and corporate defendants associated with the Karfunkel family in a proceeding brought in New York Supreme Court by plaintiffs as holders of a series of Trust Preferred Securities (“TruPS”). The TruPS were issued between 2003 and 2007, and intended to be paid using revenues from several insurance companies operating under the “Tower” and “CastlePoint” brands. By 2013, the Tower and Castlepoint insurance companies were approaching insolvency, and their parent company sought buyers to attempt to save the businesses and protect policyholders. Through a 2014 transaction that was approved by multiple state insurance commissioners, certain of the Karfunkel corporate defendants entered into acquisition, guarantee, reinsurance, and renewal agreements with various of the entities in the Tower and CastlePoint insurance group. Despite this transaction, by 2016 it was necessary to place the Tower and CastlePoint insurance companies into a California conservancy and then ultimately into liquidation. Plaintiffs allege a range of claims in respect of the 2014 transaction, all of which ultimately are attempting to establish that the Karfunkel defendants are liable for the approximately $220 million in outstanding TruPS debt that was formerly being paid by the revenues of the now liquidated Tower and CastlePoint insurance companies. The defendants deny any such liability.
  • Healthy Paws Pet Insurance, LLC Class Action (W.D. Wa.): Quinn Emanuel represents Healthy Paws Pet Insurance LLC (“Healthy Paws”), a subsidiary of Aon PLC, in a putative nationwide class action over alleged misrepresentations regarding pet health insurance policies. Plaintiffs contend that Healthy Paws mischaracterized the nature of how their pet insurance premiums would increase over time, in potential violation of Washington’s Consumer Protection Law or, alternatively in the event the court declines to apply Washington law, California’s Unfair Competition Law, Illinois’ Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, or New Jersey’s Consumer Fraud Act.
  • Ambac Assurance Corporation v. Bank of America (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2023): On behalf of Ambac, a monoline insurer, we settled an action seeking to require Bank of America to repurchase securities backed by mortgage loans issued by Countrywide (which Bank of America now owns). We alleged that that more than 80% of the loans failed to meet the standards required by Ambac’s insurance contracts, that Countrywide/Bank of America breached numerous representations and warranties concerning the mortgage loans underlying seventeen residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”) trusts that Ambac insured, and that Countrywide/Bank of America failed to re-purchase the defective loans or reimburse Ambac for claims payments made in respect of same as required by the operative contracts. After five weeks of trial in New York State’s Commercial Division, we obtained a $1.84 billion settlement that caused Ambac’s stock price to rise nearly 25%.
  • Topa Insurance Group, Inc. v. Go Maps, Inc. (Los Angeles Superior Ct. 2023): We represented an insurance agency startup, Go Maps, Inc., that seeks to improve the entire insurance process, from obtaining a quote to filing, tracking, and resolving claims. Our client faced claims from a fronting carrier after the parties’ relationship ended. The fronting carrier filed a series of emergency motions for temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions, seeking a return of commissions, surrender of documentation, and expansive information about policyholders and our client’s finances and banking records. We defeated these requests for injunctive relief across the board.
  • Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Old Republic Insurance Co., et al. (San Mateo Superior Ct. 2023): We successfully represented D&O insurer, Allied World Assurance Company (U.S.) Inc., in a bench trial addressing a question of first impression and of critical importance to the D&O industry: the definition of “Loss” and whether it covers indemnified settlements paid to resolve a shareholder dispute over the price per share paid for Amgen’s purchase of Onyx. A week-long bench trial was held in August 2018. On December 30, 2022, the court issued a Final Statement of Decision in favor of the defendant insurers, finding that the “Loss Exclusions” in the subject insurance policies excluded coverage of Onyx’s out-of-pocket settlement payment of approximately $26 million to resolve the shareholder dispute.
  • Spirit Airlines, Inc. v. American Home Assurance Co. (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2022): We represented AIG unit American Home Assurance Company in a high-profile COVID-19 business interruption case brought by Spirit Airlines. Spirit alleged hundreds of millions of dollars in business interruption losses resulting from flight cancellations, refunded and decreased ticket sales, and grounded airplanes due to the COVID-19 pandemic and related government stay-at-home orders. Spirit argued it was entitled to reimbursement under various coverage provisions in its “all-risk” property insurance policy, all of which required “direct physical loss of or damage to property” to trigger coverage. Quinn Emanuel moved to dismiss the complaint in its entirety on the grounds that the policy’s requirement of “direct physical loss or damage to property” does not include the presence of coronavirus in the air or on surfaces. The firm also argued that coverage for virus-related losses was entirely excluded by the policy’s “Pollution & Contamination Exclusion.” On August 18, 2022, the court granted American Home’s motion to dismiss in its entirety, with prejudice, on both grounds. The court’s ruling on the Pollution & Contamination Exclusion is particularly significant, as courts around the country have struggled with the issue to varying outcomes. This decision marks a rare instance in which a New York court has reached the Pollution & Contamination Exclusion’s applicability to COVID-related losses.
  • Conduent State Healthcare LLC v. AIG Specialty Insurance Company, et al. (Del. 2022): We represented defendants AIG Specialty Insurance Company and Lexington Insurance Company, two members of a $100 million tower of insurance, and we served as lead trial counsel on behalf of all insurance companies that went to trial. The plaintiff, Conduent, sued the insurance carriers to try to secure coverage of Conduent’s $236 million settlement with the Texas Attorney General’s Office. For several years, the Texas AG investigated and then pursued a claim of Medicaid Fraud against Conduent. However, immediately prior to executing the settlement agreement, Conduent convinced the Texas AG’s Office to add breach of contract and negligence claims to its petition, and then Conduent sought to allocate all of the settlement proceeds to the contract and negligence claims. The insurers were not informed of Conduent’s pressuring the Texas AG to amend, and the only communications the insurers received about the settlement negotiations misrepresented and omitted key details. In just two hours, the Delaware jury found that Conduent had committed insurance fraud, breached its duty to cooperate, and failed to settle the Texas case in good faith, findings that gave the insurers a complete coverage defense. On February 14, 2023, the court ordered a new trial for various reasons. On February 21, AIG moved for reconsideration. AIG also moved for summary judgment based on a policy exclusion for dishonest acts. The court will hear oral arguments on November 28, 2023.
  • Hartford Fire Insurance Company v. Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2022): We achieved a favorable settlement mid-way through trial for client Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. Quinn Emanuel was brought in on the eve of trial to serve as Sedgwick’s lead trial counsel in a dispute in New York Supreme Court between Sedgwick and Hartford Fire Insurance Company concerning Sedgwick’s performance of third-party administrator services for Hartford. The parties reached a settlement that fully resolved the claims after two days of trial.
  • Health Republic Insurance Co. v. United States and Common Ground Healthcare Cooperative v. United States (Court of Federal Claims): Quinn Emanuel filed two first-of-their-kind class actions against the United States based on the government’s failure to pay health insurance companies pursuant to the Affordable Care Act’s risk corridors and cost-sharing reduction programs. The firm was named class counsel for three separate classes with different claims. Unlike a typical class action, only opt-in classes are permitted in the Court of Federal Claims. Despite the efforts of other firms to steer health insurance companies away from the class action, hundreds opted-in, representing $2.2 billion, $1.75 billion, and $1.587 billion in claims, respectively. The firm achieved a major victory for the 2017-2018 cost-sharing reductions class when the Court of Federal Claims granted the class’ motion for summary judgment, finding the Government was required to pay cost-sharing reduction amounts that totaled more than $1.587 billion. The firm also prevailed for the risk corridors classes when it defeated the Government’s motion to dismiss. In subsequent appeals of parallel cases that utilized the case theories we pioneered, the Supreme Court ruled 8-1 in favor of the plaintiffs, resulting in our clients receiving nearly $4 billion in final judgments. We then moved for attorneys’ fees, seeking 5% of the judgment, an amount the Court of Federal Claims awarded us in full in September 2021.
  • Lynn Tilton and Patriarch Partners VX, LLC v. MBIA Inc. and MBIA Insurance Corp. (N.Y. Commercial Division 2021): We represented monoline insurer MBIA in defending against a plaintiff alleging $140 million in damages on claims of fraud and promissory estoppel. The plaintiff, investment fund manager Lynn Tilton, alleged that MBIA made misrepresentations in connection with a structured finance transaction for which MBIA provided bond insurance. After a two-week trial, we obtained a successful settlement resolving all claims.
  • In re Wells Fargo Auto Insurance Litigation (C.D. Cal. and 2d Cir. 2021): We successfully defended National General in a putative securities class action brought against it, contending that hundreds of thousands of Wells Fargo auto loan borrowers were charged for collateral protection insurance (“CPI”) that they did not need. National General was responsible for the administration of Wells Fargo’s CPI program. The case was related to a multi-district litigation (“MDL”) in the Central District of California that was dismissed in 2019. The case, which was based on allegations of mishandling the insurance program, insurance claims, and making improper disclosures regarding both, drew national press attention. The case was dismissed with prejudice and judgment entered, resulting in a complete victory for National General. The matter was appealed to the Second Circuit, which affirmed the dismissal on November 5, 2021.
  • Northwell Health, Inc. v. Lexington Insurance Company (D.N.Y. 2021): We achieved a significant victory for AIG unit Lexington Insurance Company in a high-profile COVID-19 business interruption case brought by Northwell Health, Inc., New York’s largest healthcare provider. Northwell alleged more than $850 million in losses when, in response to state and local orders, it stopped offering outpatient services and performing elective procedures in order to increase the number of beds available to COVID-19 patients. Quinn Emanuel moved to dismiss the complaint in its entirety, arguing that Northwell could not plausibly allege that the presence of the coronavirus in Northwell’s facilities caused “direct physical loss of or damage” to its property and that coverage for virus-related losses was entirely excluded by the policy’s “Pollution & Contamination Endorsement.” In July 2021, Quinn Emanuel’s motion was granted and the case was dismissed in its entirety on both grounds.
  • Mountain West Series of Lockton Companies, LLC and Lockton Partners, LLC v. Alliant Insurance Services, Inc. (Del. Ch. 2019): Quinn Emanuel obtained a broad preliminary injunction in Delaware Chancery Court for its clients, independent insurance brokers Mountain West Series of Lockton Companies, LLC and Lockton Partners, LLC, against competitor Alliant Insurance Services, Inc., in a case alleging tortious interference with contract and business expectancy, misappropriation of trade secrets, confidential, and proprietary information, and aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duty. In a sweeping opinion and order, the court enjoined Alliant and its affiliated entities from directly or indirectly soliciting or servicing its recruits’ former clients and prospects, including those who had already switched brokers, and directly or indirectly soliciting any Lockton employee, member, or consultant.
  • American Claims Management, Inc. v. Allied World Assurance Co. (S.D. Cal. 2019): We obtained dismissal of all claims for defendant Allied World Assurance Co. in a suit brought under a Professional Liability Insurance Policy by American Claims Management in the Southern District of California. The court found that, under California law, American Claims Management failed to state a claim for indemnity and bad faith against Allied World arising from American Claims Management’s alleged faulty handling of a claim that resulted in a significant jury award against American Claims Management’s principal.
  • Stemco Products, Inc. v. Allied World Surplus Lines Insurance Co. (Arbitration 2018): We successfully represented Allied World Surplus Lines Insurance Co., an insurer that issued a representations and warranties policy to a company that purchased a truck parts supplier, in an arbitration commenced by Stemco Products, Inc. in March 2018. After answering Stemco’s arbitration demand alleging breaches of the policy and bad faith, Allied World asserted a counterclaim for attorneys’ fees under the Texas Insurance Code. By August 2018, Quinn Emanuel prevailed in achieving a favorable global settlement of the entire dispute.
  • Anderson v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh PA (Mass. 2017): We successfully petitioned for review of, and then succeeded in reversing, a Massachusetts intermediate appellate court’s decision against AIG that a “judgment” for purposes of a treble-damages statute includes not only the amount of a judgment but also post-judgment interest that has accrued on that judgment. Because Massachusetts imposes a statutory 12% annual interest rate, that decision had increased the judgment against AIG by more than $4.2 million. The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ruled unanimously in AIG’s favor, adopting Quinn Emanuel’s interpretation of the statute and thus eliminating over a third of the judgment against AIG.
  • Sinclair Wyoming Refining Co. v. Infrassure Ltd. (D. Wyo. 2017): We were retained by Swiss reinsurer Infrassure Ltd. to defend it against bad faith and business interruption claims brought by Sinclair Wyoming Refining Co. related to a fire at one of its refineries. Infrassure is one of eighteen insurers that participated in Sinclair’s quota share property insurance program. Sinclair alleged that it suffered in excess of $100 million in damages, and that Infrassure’s failure to timely pay its share constituted breach of contract, anticipatory repudiation, and bad faith. Because Infrassure’s policy required it to pay the loss based upon the estimated timeline for repair of the refinery, it had refused to pay the portion of Sinclair's claim that exceeded the timeline. In a series of motions, Quinn Emanuel successfully obtained dismissal of all of Sinclair’s claims on summary judgment, including dismissal of its bad faith claims.
  • United States ex rel. Grabcheski v. AIG (2d Cir. 2017): We obtained a unanimous victory in the Second Circuit, where we defended a dismissal that we previously obtained for AIG in a major False Claims Act case that alleged AIG defrauded the Federal Reserve Bank of New York by hundreds of millions of dollars during the financial crisis. The case, brought by a former AIG human resources executive-turned-whistleblower, alleged that two insurance subsidiaries that AIG sold to the Federal Reserve in exchange for $25 billion in debt reduction had, for decades, engaged in unlicensed insurance business in New York. The plaintiff alleged that AIG was complicit in the illegal insurance activity, concealed it from regulators, and deliberately misled the Federal Reserve during the negotiations in order to consummate the transaction. This case posed a potential $2.5 billion liability for AIG under the False Claims Act’s treble damages provision.
  • Infrassure Ltd. v. First Mutual Transportation Assurance Co.(2d Cir. 2016): We were retained by Swiss reinsurer Infrassure Ltd. to arbitrate against First Mutual Transportation Assurance Company (“FMTAC”), the captive insurer of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, concerning damages allegedly incurred during Superstorm Sandy. Quinn Emanuel prevailed in a declaratory judgment action in the Southern District of New York resisting FMTAC’s attempt to compel arbitration under the London Arbitration Clauses. The Second Circuit, in a case of first impression, held that Infrassure was not bound by the London Arbitration Clauses contained in an endorsement to the policy, as those clauses were captioned “UK and Bermuda Insurers Only.” In reaching its decision, the Second Circuit rejected FMTAC’s argument that “UK and Bermuda Insurers Only” should be disregarded under the “Titles Clause” of the Reinsurance Certificate, which provided that the titles of the certificate’s provisions have no meaning.
  • CIFG Assurance North America, Inc. v. J.P. Morgan Securities LLC (f/k/a “Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc.”) (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep’t 2015): On behalf of client CIFG, now known as Assured Guaranty, Quinn Emanuel convinced a New York state appellate court to modify the lower court’s dismissal of a misrepresentation claim with prejudice to a dismissal without prejudice, thus allowing CIFG to replead the claim in its effort to recover from Bear Stearns for inducing CIFG to issue financial guaranty insurance regarding collateralized debt obligation vehicles that Bear Stearns had loaded with risky assets.
  • Financial Guaranty Insurance Company v. Putnam Advisory Company, LLC (2d Cir. 2015): We represented Financial Guaranty Insurance Company in a case relating to a $900 million insurance policy on a credit default swap referencing a $1.5 billion collateralized debt obligation. We obtained a complete reversal from the Second Circuit of the district court’s order dismissing the complaint for failure to state a claim, protecting our client’s right to pursue its claims for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and negligence.
  • Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. United Guaranty Corporation (11th Cir. 2015): On behalf of mortgage insurer United Guaranty, we defeated a third party’s motion to intervene in a district court case in which United Guaranty was a party that risked disrupting the prior resolution of the district court case. We then defeated the third party’s appeal to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
  • American International Group, Inc. v. New York State Department of Financial Services (S.D.N.Y. 2014): We negotiated a favorable settlement for our client AIG in its lawsuit against the Superintendent of the New York Department of Financial Services (“DFS”) in response to DFS’s assertion that certain AIG subsidiaries had engaged in illegal and undisclosed insurance activities in New York. Quinn Emanuel asserted that DFS’s stated interpretation and enforcement of the insurance laws was unconstitutional. Following motion to dismiss briefing, we obtained a favorable settlement for AIG, which was much less than the amount paid by MetLife for related allegations that spanned a much shorter time period.
  • Riddle v. Bank of America Corp., et al. (3d Cir. 2014): We represented United Guaranty in ten class actions alleging that the reinsurance it purchased on its mortgage insurance portfolio from captive reinsurers affiliated with lending banks was an illegal “kickback” in violation of the Real Estate Settlement Practices Act (“RESPA”). After obtaining dismissals of several of the class actions on statute of limitations grounds, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted summary judgment dismissing the claims against United Guaranty. Plaintiffs appealed and the Third Circuit affirmed, concluding that that the plaintiffs failed to meet their “diligence” obligations because they did nothing to attempt to discover their claims at any time between their loan closings and the time, years later, when they were contacted by their lawyers.
  • AIG Domestic Claims, Inc. v. Hess Oil Co. (W. Va. 2013): We won a unanimous victory for AIG in the West Virginia Supreme Court, vacating all that was left of a $58 million jury verdict against subsidiaries of AIG involved in an environmental insurance coverage dispute. Quinn Emanuel first challenged the underlying punitive damages and successfully reduced that verdict by $28 million on post-trial motions. We then litigated the remaining $30 million before the West Virginia Supreme Court, which rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that they were entitled to damages against a corporation for alleged injuries to its shareholders, and zeroed out the judgment.
  • United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company v. American Re-Insurance Company, et al. (N.Y. 2013): In a case where reinsurers challenged the allocation of a $1 billion settlement of asbestos related liabilities, we obtained a 5-0 victory in the New York Court of Appeals in a landmark decision on the “follow the fortunes” doctrine. Because most reinsurance agreements are governed by New York law, this decision is widely followed and will have a widespread impact on the insurance industry.
  • Ford Motor Co. v. National Indemnity Co. (E.D. Va. 2013): We defended Berkshire Hathaway affiliate, National Indemnity Co., in a challenge to its business model of purchasing and running off policies on behalf of policy-issuing companies. Ford filed the action in federal court claiming that National Indemnity had violated Virginia’s conspiracy statute and engaged in tortious interference with contract by causing its insurer to refuse to pay allegedly valid claims. The conspiracy statute carries severe penalties, including trebling of damages. We obtained summary judgment dismissing the conspiracy claims, thereby eliminating Ford’s claim for treble damages.
  • Various United Guaranty Reinsurance Litigation Matters: We were lead counsel for United Guaranty, which was named as a defendant in over ten class actions brought under Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974 (“RESPA”). The class plaintiffs all alleged violations of RESPA’s anti-kickback provisions arising from United Guaranty’s practice of obtaining reinsurance for its mortgage insurance policies from captive insurers affiliated with lending banks. We obtained dismissals in nine of the class actions on various grounds including that the actions were time barred and that the class plaintiff lacked standing to bring the claims. See, e.g., White v. PNC Bank, et al. (E.D. Pa.); Menichino v. Citibank, et al. (W.D. Pa.); Manners v. Fifth Third Bank, et al. (W.D. Pa.); Cunningham v. M&T Bank (M.D. Pa); and McCarn v. HSBC, et al. (E.D. Ca.). Plaintiff has appealed Samp v. J.P. Morgan, et al. (C.D. Cal.) and Orange v. Wachovia Bank (C.D. Cal.) to the Ninth Circuit.
  • In re Chinese-Manufactured Drywall Products Liability Litigation (E.D. La.): We represented AIG and its subsidiaries in numerous class action and individual lawsuits related to defective Chinese-manufactured drywall products, much of which was consolidated in a multi-district litigation in the Eastern District of Louisiana.
  • Royal Park Investments, SA/NV v. CIFG Assurance North America, Inc. (N.Y. Sup. Ct.): We represented CIFG, now known as Assured Guaranty, in an action in which CIFG was alleged to have breached two agreements with Royal Park Investments, SA/NV (“RPI”), a special purpose vehicle formed to hold Fortis Bank assets, arising from a mortgage-backed securities bond issuance that RPI purchased and CIFG insured. RPI sought to recover its purported share of liquidation proceeds that CIFG obtained upon liquidation of the collateral on the grounds that, in agreeing to forego RPI’s right to CIFG’s insurance on the bonds, RPI was entitled to its share of the liquidated proceeds. Following extensive summary judgment briefing and argument, we obtained a complete dismissal, with prejudice, of RPI’s claim.
  • MBIA v. Countrywide, et al. (N.Y. Sup. Ct.): We secured a major victory for our client, MBIA Insurance Corporation. In Justice Bransten’s decision on the parties’ summary judgment motions, she adopted virtually the entire legal framework advocated by Quinn Emanuel. The ruling impacts other insurers and investors in RMBS who have sued issuers of RMBS for fraud and breach of contract. First, insurers in New York now have a clear path to recovery on misrepresentation claims, where they need not show either reasonable reliance or loss causation (beyond inducement to enter the transaction, or transaction causation). Second, insurers and investors in RMBS now can enforce repurchase claims for material breach regardless of whether or why the defective loans are in default or delinquency. In other words, the contractual requirement of “material and adverse effect” is tested as of the closing date only, rendering the housing collapse and financial crisis irrelevant. Third, insurers and investors can rely on the “no default” provisions in mortgage notes to capture borrower misrepresentations even where the transaction documents do not contain a representation and warranty prohibiting borrower fraud.
  • MBIA v. Countrywide, et al. (N.Y. Sup. Ct.): Relatedly, we secured a significant ruling for our client, MBIA Insurance Corporation, in connection with its multi-billion dollar claims against Bank of America Corporation and Countrywide, filed in the Commercial Division of the New York State Supreme Court. The court held that: (i) New York, not Delaware, law applied to a de facto merger claim against Bank of America; (ii) reliance is not an element of a successor liability claim based on a theory of implied assumption of liabilities; (iii) the payment of billions of dollars for Countrywide’s assets is not relevant to a de facto merger claim; and (iv) a strict asset-for-stock sale is not necessary to establish continuity of ownership under a de facto merger claim. Numerous plaintiffs across the country have alleged that Bank of America should be held liable for Countrywide’s misconduct, and this ruling establishes the correct legal standards to prove such claims at trial.
  • Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp. v. UBS Real Estate Securities, Inc. (S.D.N.Y.): We represented Assured Guaranty in its lawsuit in the Southern District of New York against UBS Real Estate Securities, Inc. (“UBS”) arising out of Assured’s issuance of financial guaranty insurance for RMBS underwritten and marketed by UBS. On May 6, 2013, after a series of procedural wins for Assured, UBS agreed to settle Assured’s claims for breaches of representations and warranties for $360 million plus an ongoing reinsurance obligation covering 85% of Assured’s forward liabilities with respect to the insured certificates.
  • Axa Vericherung AG v. New Hampshire Insurance Co. (2d Cir.): We obtained a complete victory for our client, AIG, when we convinced the Second Circuit to vacate a nearly $35 million judgment in a complex reinsurance case against several AIG subsidiaries and to remand the case to the district court for entry of judgment in AIG’s favor.
  • Horowitz v. American International Group, Inc. (S.D.N.Y. and 2d Cir.): We obtained dismissal with prejudice and affirmation in the Second Circuit of that dismissal of a nationwide class action against Chartis Insurance Group brought by investors in Bernard Madoff’s Ponzi scheme who demanded that their insurers compensate them for loss of fictitious profits.
  • Nevada Viatical Sales (Nev.): We defended AI Credit, a subsidiary of AIG, against fraud and contract claims in Nevada State Court arising out of its funding of life insurance viatical sales. The case settled favorably before trial.
  • National Council on Compensation Insurance, Inc. v. American International Group, Inc. (E.D. Ill.): We obtained dismissal with prejudice of a $1 billion civil fraud and RICO action brought against AIG by a nationwide reinsurance pool, in a case that involved allegations of premium underreporting that had precipitated a $350 million settlement with former New York Attorney General Elliot Spitzer.
  • Park Terrace LLC v. Transportation Insurance Co. (Wis.): We were retained after trial and, on appeal, obtained reversal of an $8 million award of bad faith and punitive damages, which was the largest award of such damages against an insurer in Wisconsin history.
  • In re Arbitration Between Houston Casualty Co. and CineFinance Insurance Services (Arbitration): After a ten-day arbitration, we obtained a complete victory, including an award of $3.9 million attorney’s fees and costs, for Houston Casualty Company and CineFinance Insurance Services (“HCC”) in a dispute concerning the financing of a motion picture titled “Tekken.” HCC guaranteed the financiers of “Tekken” that the film would be completed and delivered by November 29, 2009, but the film was not delivered until December 2010, over a year later with no written extension or waiver of the delivery date. One of the financiers, Newbridge, initiated an arbitration against HCC claiming $15.8 million under the completion guaranty. Although Newbridge never agreed to extend the delivery date, the Arbitrator found that Newbridge knew that the film could not be completed and delivered by November 29 and waived the delivery date. He denied Newbridge any relief and awarded HCC its attorney’s fees and costs.
  • Fireman’s Fund Insurance Co. v. North Pacific Insurance Co. (9th Cir.): We were retained after trial and persuaded the Ninth Circuit to vacate a multi-million dollar judgment against our insurer client, finding on a case of first impression that the trial court had failed to consider whether an insurer targeted by an all-sums election who seeks contribution must provide adequate notice to co-insurers.
  • Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp. v. JP Morgan Chase and Syncora Guaranty Inc. v. Jefferson County (N.Y. Sup. Ct.): Assured Guaranty and Syncora retained us to recoup over $700 million in rescissionary damages from J.P. Morgan and Jefferson County, Alabama on claims of fraud and aiding and abetting fraud in connection with solicitation of bond insurance policies. These cases have been resolved.
sticky image