Arent Fox Wins Sanctions After AAUG Insurance Company Violates Injunction Order
| PR Newswire Association LLC |
Former AAUG President
"This case illustrates an appalling disregard by a global insurance company towards its policyholders – a disregard that continued even after the company and its principal were found in contempt for contemptuous conduct that included numerous secret transfers of funds in violation of the preliminary injunction order," said
"AAUG first failed in its fundamental obligation to pay the healthcare claims of its policyholders, but added insult to injury by repeatedly ignoring a federal court's order that froze all of its assets and accounts and required it to pay a forensic accountant retained by our client to inspect its books and records to trace the millions of dollars in premiums that were paid by our client and other international schools under the insurance program." Also working with ISS were Arent Fox Litigation partner
ISS brought suit in early
Following a temporary restraining order entered upon an ex parte application, signed on
Shortly after the injunction was entered,
Following an evidentiary hearing, the court held defendants in contempt or violating the preliminary injunction, but reserved ruling on sanctions pending AAUG's appeals. After the appeals were dismissed by the 11th Circuit, the district court granted ISS' motion to lift the preliminary injunction in early 2012, stating that the Preliminary Injunction Order was "set aside."
In an Order issued on
Judge Altonga recognized that sanctions for civil contempt are limited to: (1) compensating the other party; and (2) remediating the violation committed. Since the injunction has been lifted, remediation (i.e., sanctions that were tailored to cause the contemnor to comply with the prior order) was not an option. The only civil sanctions available would be those that compensated ISS for defendants' conduct.
Accordingly,
Defendants have been ordered to make payment within 14 days of receiving an invoice from ISS. The Court implicitly warned defendants that failure to comply with the Sanctions Order has serious repercussions:
Defendants are surely aware of the serious nature of violating a court order – parties may be imprisoned for such behavior. See, e.g., Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n v.
Wellington Precious Metals, Inc. , 950 F.2d 1525, 1531 (11th Cir. 1992) (affirming district court's imprisonment of a party found to be in civil contempt for violating a court order). The Court fully expects Defendants will demonstrate absolute and timely adherence to the Court's dictates.
About
|
From: |
|
|
|
SOURCE
| Wordcount: | 1208 |


Brandywine Realty Trust Announces Third Quarter Leasing Activity
Advisor News
- CT governor’s candidates claims: What’s true, and what’s misleading
- Retaining clients by giving them a memorable experience
- Addressing the longevity paradox
- Employers shift focus from retirement access to financial outcomes
- Helping widowed clients navigate their new financial reality
More Advisor NewsAnnuity News
- Symetra and TIAA Announce Launch of Mariner Re
- Jackson Launches Suite of Fixed Index Annuities Focused on Accumulation
- Farm Bureau P&C insurers post first underwriting gain since 2021
- Legacy Marketing, Malibu Life launch two fixed indexed annuities
- Changing client priorities are reshaping annuity conversations
More Annuity NewsHealth/Employee Benefits News
- 10 things to know about open enrollment for 2027
- WITH FEDERAL MEDICAID CHANGES, BROWN STUDENTS AIM TO HELP PEOPLE STAY COVERED ON HEALTH INSURANCE
- HEALTH COVERAGE CONSUMERS SHOULD BE WARY OF SUBPAR PRODUCTS
- Study: Colorado's Medicaid covers more services than private insurance
- South Philly Shoppers Face Higher 2027 ACA Premiums as Open Enrollment Opens Nov. 1
More Health/Employee Benefits NewsLife Insurance News