Appeals Court Reinstates New Regs on Title Insurance Industry
A state appeals court has reinstated regulations on the title insurance industry enacted to prohibit insurers from wining and dining attorneys and real estate agents in exchange for business referrals and passing those costs along to consumers.
January 15, 2019 at 04:56 PM
3 minute read
A state appeals court has reinstated regulations on the title insurance industry enacted to prohibit insurers from wining and dining attorneys and real estate agents in exchange for business referrals and passing those costs along to consumers.
A panel from the Appellate Division, First Department on Tuesday reversed Manhattan Supreme Court Eileen Rakower's order to annul the new regulations, promulgated by the state Department of Financial Services, on the grounds that they were arbitrary and capricious.
The new rules, called Insurance Regulation 208, prohibit insurers from offering tickets and other outings as inducements for business and restricts spending on meals and beverages to instances where there is no expectation that the recipient of the gifts intends to purchase insurance.
Writing for the panel, Justice Anil Singh said that DFS did not overreach its authority in putting forward the new rules.
Justices John Sweeny, Ellen Gesmer and Jeffrey Oing joined Singh on the unanimous decision.
In a statement issued after the ruling, DFS Superintendent Maria Vullo said the regulation will provide New Yorkers with relief from inflated insurance premiums.
“As I have maintained throughout this years-long process, the practice of using high-priced tickets, meals, lavish gifts and strip clubs as inducements for title insurance business is prohibited by New York Insurance Law, and those improper expenditures may not be passed on to consumers,” Vullo said.
Assistant Attorneys General Steven Wu and Matthew William Grieco appeared for DFS.
The New York State Land Title Association, which represents the title insurance industry and which has retained a team from Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, argues that the regulations will “wreak havoc” on the industry and disrupt real estate markets.
Gibson Dunn partner Mylan Denerstein, who previously served as counsel to Gov. Andrew Cuomo, said the First Department's ruling states that the DFS “overstepped its bounds on some issues.”
“In the end, the title insurance industry will continue to protect and serve New Yorkers as they make what is usually the most expensive purchase of their lives,” Denerstein said.
Gibson Dunn associates Akiva Shapiro and David Coon are also working on the case.
The new rules were enacted following a DFS investigation the title insurance industry's activities from 2008 to 2012 and found eye-popping examples of insurers spending lavishly on their clients.
One insurer, according to court papers, spent between $2.5 million and $5.4 million on tickets to sporting events that were given to attorneys and other clients who were in a position to send business the insurer's way.
Other insurers plunked down big sums for designer goods or trips to bars, strip clubs and Hooters restaurants, the First Department ruling states.
The department found that insurers were labeling these expenses as advertising and marketing costs; it estimated that, on average, about 5.3 percent of premiums charged violated state anti-inducement laws.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDecision of the Day: Attorney in Social Security Case Awarded Fees, But Must Pay Client Refund Under Equal Access to Justice Act
Decision of the Day: Former IDF Soldier Cannot Remain Anonymous in Workplace Discrimination Suit, Court Finds
Dapper Labs $4M Settlement, $1.3M in Attorney Fees Reveal NFT Settlement Trend
4 minute readDecision of the Day: De Blasio Must Sit for Deposition in Suit Over City Program to Transfer Foreclosed Properties
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 3Guarantees Are Back, Whether Law Firms Want to Talk About Them or Not
- 4How I Made Practice Group Chair: 'If You Love What You Do and Put the Time and Effort Into It, You Will Excel,' Says Lisa Saul of Forde & O'Meara
- 5Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250