Julie Schulz Halbower v. Hiscox Syndicate 33 of Lloyd's of London -Western District of Michigan at Grand Rapids
Split Score
What is a Split Score?
This score (0-100) indicates how likely this case is to be reviewed by the Supreme Court based on:
Case Summary
Disposition
Vacated
The Sixth Circuit vacated the district court’s dismissal of a coverage suit brought by Julie Schulz Halbower against Hiscox Syndicate 33, holding that the lower court relied on an incorrect diversity-jurisdiction analysis. The panel ruled that, under Carden v. Arkoma Associates, the citizenship of every underwriting “Name” in a Lloyd’s syndicate must be considered, and it remanded for jurisdictional discovery to determine each Name’s citizenship.
Circuit Split Identified
Legal Issue
Whether federal courts assessing diversity jurisdiction over a Lloyd’s of London syndicate must consider the citizenship of every individual underwriting “Name” (treating the syndicate as an unincorporated association) or may instead rely only on the citizenship of the managing agent/active underwriters listed on the policy.
Circuit Positions
Citizenship of every underwriting Name determines diversity; a Lloyd’s syndicate is an unincorporated association.
Diversity may be based on the citizenship of the active-underwriters/managing agent listed on the policy without examining all Names (Layne approach).
Conflict Summary
The Second, Seventh, and Eleventh Circuits (and now the Sixth Circuit in this opinion) require courts to treat a Lloyd’s syndicate as an unincorporated association whose citizenship is that of each underwriting Name, thereby demanding complete diversity as to every Name. Earlier Sixth Circuit precedent in Certain Interested Underwriters v. Layne had allowed diversity to be established by looking solely to the citizenship of the active-underwriters/managing agent identified on the policy, without inquiring into the citizenship of all Names.