Opinion

Pitre v. Family Security Insurance Company

Court
District Court, E.D. Louisiana
Filed
Mar 7, 2023
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 22.4%

The opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

PHILLIP PITRE CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS CASE NO. 22-2508

FAMILY SECURITY INSURANCE CO. SECTION: “G”

ORDER

On March 2, 2023, Defendant Family Security Insurance Co. (“Defendant”) filed a “Notice

of Filing Consent Order of Liquidation, Notice of Automatic and Permanent Stay.”1 In the notice,

Defendant informs the Court that Defendant merged with United Property and Casualty Insurance

Co. (“UPC”) and that UPC is the surviving entity.2 Defendant also notifies the Court that, after

the merger, UPC was declared insolvent and placed into liquidation.3

The Fifth Circuit has recognized that “insolvent insurers are subject to the comprehensive

oversight of state administrative agencies and courts” and “[f]ederal law consigns to the states the

primary responsibility for regulating the insurance industry.”4 Accordingly, the Fifth Circuit has

held that “allowing a creditor or claimant to proceed against an insolvent insurer in federal court

while a state insolvency proceeding is pending would usurp [the state’s] control over the

liquidation proceeding by allowing [the claimant] to preempt others in the distribution of [the

1 Rec. Doc. 14.

2 Id. at 1 n.1.

3 Id. at 1.

4 Clark v. Fitzgibbons, 105 F.3d 1049, 1051 (5th Cir. 1997) (citing the McCarran–Ferguson Act).

1

insurance company’s] assets.”° Such a statutory scheme exists in Louisiana. Under Louisiana law,

proceedings in which the insolvent insurer 1s a party or is obligated to defend a party in any

court in this state shall be stayed for six months.”®

In light of Louisiana’s comprehensive statutory scheme for regulating insolvent insurers

and Fifth Circuit precedent admonishing courts to avoid interfering with state administrative

processes involving insolvent insurers, the Court exercises its discretion to stay the claims pending

against Defendant for a period of six months.’ Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-captioned action is STAYED AND

ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED for a period of six months. The case shall be reopened upon

a motion of a party at the conclusion of the six-month period.

NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA, this 6th day of March, 2023.

NANNETTE JOLIVETTE BROWN

CHIEF JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5 Id. (internal citation and quotation omitted).

6 La. Rev. Stat. § 22:2068(A).

T See Landis v. North American Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936).

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.