This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Insurance
Declaratory Relief
Disability Insurance Benefits

Insurance Company of North America v. Matson Terminals Inc., Matson Navigation Company Inc.

Published: Aug. 9, 2014 | Result Date: Apr. 10, 2014 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2:13-cv-08958-SJO-FFM Bench Decision –  Defense

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Ray L. Wong


Defendant

Philip L. Pillsbury Jr.
(Pillsbury & Coleman LLP)

Ingrid S. Leverett
(Pillsbury & Coleman LLP)


Facts

Insurance Co. of North America filed an action against Matson Terminals Inc. and Matson Navigation Co. Inc., seeking declaratory relief related to an insurance policy.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff alleged that it issued an insurance policy to defendants. Defendants were international shipping companies subject to the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act. Plaintiff alleged that defendants purchased the policy to cover their LHWCA liability in excess of $250,000 for each employee suffering either permanent total disability or death. In 2013, defendants filed a claim demanding that plaintiff indemnify them for over $4 million in Special Fund assessments paid to the federal government since 1984. However, plaintiff contended that defendant's policy did not cover such assessments. As such, plaintiff refused coverage. In response, defendants filed a motion to arbitrate the dispute, thereby prompting plaintiff to file this instant action.

Plaintiff sought a declaratory judgment as to whether the policy's arbitration clause applied to defendants' demand, and whether the policy covered the Special Fund assessments.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants sought to dismiss the complaint on the basis of improper venue.

Result

On March 21, 2014, the court determined that the arbitration clause did not apply to defendants' demand, and denied defendants' motion to compel arbitration. With respect to defendants' motion to dismiss based on improper venue, the court granted the motion and dismissed the matter.

Other Information

FILING DATE: Dec. 4, 2013.


#99454

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390