Munich American Reinsurance Co. v. Crawford

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• ruling that district court abused its discretion in invoking Burford abstention in action brought to compel arbitration under FAA, after having found that parties’ contracts contained valid and binding arbitration clauses
• finding that state laws regulating the business of insurance may suspend federal remedies under the F A A
• \[C]onsolidation prevents the unnecessary and wasteful dissipation of the insolvent company's funds that would occur if the receiver had to defend unconnected suits in different forums across the country.\
• “Prior to Quackenbush, we and other courts had consistently approved Burford abstention in actions against an insurance company involved in ongoing state delinquency proceedings.”
• “Ordinarily, federal law pre-empts conflicting state law by virtue of the Supremacy Clause. The McCarran-Ferguson Act reverses that effect in the narrow range of cases involving state regulation of the insurance industry.”
• “We surely are not saying that a State has the power to enjoin a party generally from pursuing federal remedies in federal court. Nor are we saying that Oklahoma [insurance] law divested the district court of its diversity, jurisdiction”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).