Description: This article describes an interesting decision entered by the Florida Supreme Court. It was held that an insurance company’s failure to investigate circumstances relating to the issuance of a life insurance policy- where the company received notice of the beneficiary’s murderous intentions- constituted a tort under Florida law for damages arising from the beneficiary’s attempt to murder the insured in order to collect the benefits.

Description: This article discusses three litigation issues: 1. Shelter Framing Corp. v. PBGC: This is a case recently placed on the Appellate Docket of the U.S. Supreme Court being appealed from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. That Circuit Court held that the Multiemployer Pension Plan amendments Act, which imposes liability on employers who withdrew from multiemployer plans, is unconstitutional as applied to employers who withdraw before the Act’s enactment but after its retroactively effective date. 2. Federal Trade Commission: The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has held that an investigation by the FTC into whether finance companies and auto dealerships were engaging in unfair and deceptive practices by representing that purchase of credit life insurance was required as a condition to obtain financing, was not outside the FTC’s power. 3. Baldwin-United Case: Under the rehabilitation plan for Baldwin-United, the Company would refund $3.7 billion to the annuity holders. Several groups are challenging this decision.