ReliaStar Life Insurance Co. of N.Y. v. EMC National Life Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
564 F.3d 81 (2009)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
ReliaStar Life Insurance Co. of N.Y. (ReliaStar) (defendant) and National Travelers Life Company (Travelers) (plaintiff) were parties to coinsurance agreements. The coinsurance agreements had identical terms and conditions and contained an agreement to arbitrate. Section 10.1 of the arbitration agreement appointed arbitrators to “decide any dispute or difference” between the parties related to the coinsurance agreements. Three arbitrators would decide a dispute by majority vote. Section 10.3 of the arbitration agreement stated that each party would bear the cost of its own attorney’s fees and costs and the fees of one arbitrator, and the parties would share the costs of the third arbitrator. In 2006, Travelers initiated arbitration against ReliaStar and its successor-in-interest, EMC National Life Co. (EMC) (defendant). Travelers sought a declaration terminating the coinsurance agreements under Travelers’ proposed method of accounting. Following a hearing, the arbitration panel found that the coinsurance agreements remained in force and ordered Travelers to pay ReliaStar more than $21 million in past-due amounts. Further, the arbitrators awarded ReliaStar over $4 million in attorney’s and arbitrator’s fees and costs based on Travelers’s arbitration conduct, which a majority of the panel explained had been lacking good faith. In district court, Travelers filed a petition to vacate the portion of the award granting fees and costs. The district court vacated the award to that extent. ReliaStar appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Raggi, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.