Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Attorneys Insurance Mutual of Alabama, Inc. v. Alabama Department of Insurance

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Decided October 22, 2010No. 2081139Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partThompson, Presiding Judge

I concur in all the portions of the main opinion except that pertaining to the loss-reserves issue. As to that issue, I respectfully dissent.

The main opinion, in reaching its conclusion that the trial court’s affirmance of the commissioner’s decision on the issue of loss reserves was arbitrary and capricious, has determined that, in the absence of a showing of harm to the insurance company or its policyholders, conservative loss reserves are reasonable. 64 So.3d at 20 (the trial court’s decision was arbitrary because it was “based only on a dispute between actuaries about loss-reserve amounts…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. ALA. DEPT. OF PUBLIC HEALTH v. PerkinsCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1985
  2. STATE DEPT. OF HUMAN RESOURCES v. GibertCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1995
  3. Old Southern Life Insurance v. State Department of InsuranceCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1988

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API