Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Shasta Linen Supply, Inc. v. Applied Underwriters, Inc.

Supreme Court of Nebraska

April 10, 2015

SHASTA LINEN SUPPLY, INC., APPELLEE,
v.
APPLIED UNDERWRITERS, INC., AND APPLIED UNDERWRITERS CAPTIVE RISK ASSURANCE COMPANY, INC., APPELLANTS

Page 426

Appeal fro the District Court for Douglas County: DUANE C. DOUGHERTY, Judge.

Jeffrey A. Silver for appellants.

Robert D. Mullin, Jr., of McGrath, North, Mullin & Kratz, P.C., L.L.O., for appellee.

HEAVICAN, C.J., WRIGHT, CONNOLLY, STEPHAN, MCCORMACK, MILLER-LERMAN, and CASSEL, JJ.

OPINION

Page 427

[290 Neb. 641] Connolly, J.

SUMMARY

Shasta Linen Supply, Inc. (Shasta), a California corporation, contracted to have the appellant insurer, Applied Underwriters, Inc. (Applied), a Nebraska corporation, provide workers' compensation coverage to Shasta. Shasta accepted Applied's proposed policy through an agreement entitled a " Request to Bind Coverages & Services." On the same day, Shasta entered into a " Reinsurance Participation Agreement" (RPA) with Applied's subsidiary, Applied Underwriters Captive Risk Assurance Company, Inc. (AUCRA), a British Virgin Islands corporation. The request to bind and the RPA contained conflicting provisions regarding the parties' agreed-upon arbitration process for resolving disputes.

After a dispute arose, Shasta filed this action, seeking a declaration that the request to bind required arbitration by " JAMS" in Omaha, Nebraska. Shasta also sought injunctive relief. Applied and AUCRA moved to dismiss the proceeding, arguing that the RPA required Shasta's contract dispute to be arbitrated by the American Arbitration Association (AAA). The court determined that it had jurisdiction to decide which contract provision controlled. It issued a temporary injunction and stay of the AAA arbitration until it decided the parties' rights. Applied and AUCRA appeal from this order, assigning that the court erred in exercising jurisdiction over the matter and granting a temporary injunction.

[290 Neb. 642] We conclude that Applied and AUCRA have not appealed from a final order and dismiss their appeal.

BACKGROUND

In 2009, Shasta applied for workers' compensation insurance coverage from Applied, and Applied responded with a quote for a proposed policy. The proposed ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.