Opinion
Civil Action 20-2389
08-09-2022
CALLEN J. CORTEZ, ET AL. v. LAMORAK INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL.
SECTION “R” (1)
ORDER AND REASONS
SARAH S. VANCE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
The Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association (“LIGA”) moves for summary judgment, asserting that it has no obligation to pay claims as statutory obligor under the policies of now-defunct Lamorak Insurance Company covering Huntington Ingalls, Inc. (“Avondale”) and its executive officers. LIGA asserts that its liability is foreclosed by the net worth exclusion in La. Rev. Stat. § 22:2061.1.Plaintiffs oppose the motion.
R. Doc. 434.
R. Doc. 434 at 5-17.
R. Doc. 671.
Under Louisiana law, LIGA “shall not be obligated to pay any claims or provide any defense to any claims asserted for coverage under a policy when the insured is a high net worth insured.” La. Rev. Stat. § 22:2061.1. A high net worth insured is defined as “any policyholder . . . whose net worth exceeds twenty-five million dollars,” subsidiaries and affiliates included. Id. Considering LIGA's deposition testimony, the affidavit of the Assistant Treasurer of Huntington Ingalls submitted to LIGA attesting that “as of December 31, 2020, the consolidated net worth of HII, including the fair market values of all its subsidiaries and affiliates, exceeded Twenty-Five Million and no/100 ($25,000,000) Dollars,” and the mechanisms of La. Rev. Stat. § 22:2061.1, there can be no genuine dispute that Avondale is valued in excess of $25,000,000.00.
R. Doc. 434-5 at 20 (Deposition of LIGA at 71:2-3) (“We have an affidavit provided by Avondale that they exceed 25 million [in consolidated net worth].”)
R. Doc. 841-1.
Under LIGA law, the affidavit is confidential. The Court has reviewed it in camera and quotes the relevant language.
Accordingly, as to liability arising from Lamorak's coverage of Avondale, the Court GRANTS defendant's motion. As to liability arising from coverage of Avondale's executive officers, the Court DENIES the motion without prejudice to LIGA's right to reassert its motion, if necessary, post-verdict. After a trial, the Court may have a more complete context to evaluate the effect of the parties' conflicting statutory interpretations on the purposes behind LIGA law.