In This Issue:

- Southern District of New York Predicts That California Would Adopt Bad Faith Exception to Requirement That a Reinsurer Prove Prejudice for Late Notice Defense:

The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York held that a cedent failed to provide timely notice to its reinsurer as a matter of law, but that there were genuine issues of fact as to whether the reinsurer was prejudiced by the late notice and whether the reinsurer was excused from proving prejudice due to the cedent’s gross negligence or bad faith in its claims handling. Insurance Co. of the State of Pennsylvania v. Argonaut Insurance Co., No. 12 Civ. 6494(DLC), 2013 WL 4005109 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 6, 2013)...

- District Court Refuses to Compel Separate Arbitrations Arising From Separate Reinsurance Contracts:

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California refused to appoint an umpire or to compel separate arbitrations where only one demand for arbitration was made and the parties had not reached an impasse in selecting an umpire. Granite State Insurance Co. v. Clearwater Insurance Co., No. C 13-2924 SI, 2013 WL 4482948 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 2013)...

- District Court Holds That Certain Demands For Payment To Retrocessionaires Were Barred By The Statute of Limitations:

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois applied English law in concluding that a retrocession contract created an open account but that certain claims under the contract were barred by the statute of limitations. Republic Insurance Co. v. Banco De Seguros Del Estado, No. 10 C 5039, 2013 WL 3874027 (N.D. Ill. July 26, 2013).