Malone

Malone v. Equitas Reinsurance Ltd.

Good Law
101 Cal. Rptr. 2d 524·84 Cal. App. 4th 1430
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 27, 2000B136005California3,390 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mallano, J.

This case is just one of many in which individual underwriters at Lloyd’s of London have sued English entities in the United States based on events that occurred in England. The trial court dismissed the action for lack of personal jurisdiction. We conclude that defendants did not have the requisite contacts with the State of California and affirm.

Background

Lloyd’s of London, though not an insurance company itself, provides a marketplace for insurance underwriters. Underwriters at Lloyd’s, including plaintiffs, are known as “Names.” They combine in “syndicates” to underwrite insurance. Each Name has a percentage share in the syndicates of which he or she is a member.

The underwriting capacity of each syndicate is supplied by the funds advanced by the Names. Excess losses—those that exceed the premiums paid—are covered by the Names’ commitment to pay losses from their personal assets. As a condition of membership at Lloyd’s, the Names execute a “General Undertaking” by which they acknowledge their unlimited financial commitment to cover losses.

Faced with the possibility of unlimited liability, many Names procure personal stop-loss policies, which essentially…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.