SAN FRANCISCO — It seems quixotic. Two Latham & Watkins attorneys argue that the California Supreme Court made a big mistake just nine years ago when it issued Henkel v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity, on the transfer of insurance policy assets when businesses are sold. The lawyers argue that the high court overlooked an obscure 140-year-old statute that controls the question.

Last summer the Fourth District Court of Appeal ridiculed the notion. “If the rule of law in Henkel is to be vitiated, the Legislature in the 21st century, not the Legislature in the 19th century, must do it,” Justice Raymond Ikola wrote for a unanimous panel.

This content has been archived.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

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]