DOCSLIB.ORG

GEORGIA, STATE of MICHIGAN, and STATE of WISCONSIN, Defendants

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
GEORGIA, STATE of MICHIGAN, and STATE of WISCONSIN, Defendants No. 22O155 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES STATE OF TEXAS, Plaintiff, v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, STATE OF GEORGIA, STATE OF MICHIGAN, AND STATE OF WISCONSIN, Defendants. ___________________ On Motion for Leave to File Bill of Complaint GEORGIA’S OPPOSITION TO TEXAS’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BILL OF COMPLAINT AND ITS MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY RELIEF Christopher M. Carr Attorney General of Georgia Andrew A. Pinson Solicitor General of Georgia Counsel of Record Ross W. Bergethon Deputy Solicitor General Drew F. Waldbeser Assistant Solicitor General Office of the Attorney General 40 Capitol Square SW Atlanta, Georgia 30334 (404) 458-3409 [email protected] Counsel for the State of Georgia* Brian D. Boone William H. Jordan Brandon C.E. Springer Bryan W. Lutz J. Stephen Tagert* Lee A. Deneen ALSTON & BIRD LLP William J. Repko 101 S. Tryon Street #4000 ALSTON & BIRD LLP Charlotte, NC 28280 1201 West Peachtree Street (704) 444-1000 Atlanta, Georgia 30309 [email protected] (404) 881-7000 *Admitted to practice in New [email protected] York only. Joseph H. Hunt Erik S. Jaffe ALSTON & BIRD LLP James A. Heilpern* 950 F Street, NW Joshua J. Prince Washington, D.C. 20004 SCHAERR|JAFFE LLP Telephone: 202-239-3300 1717 K Street NW, Suite [email protected] 900 Washington, DC 20006 (202) 787-1060 [email protected] *Admitted to practice in Virginia. Counsel for the State of Georgia i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .........................................................1 STATEMENT ................................................................2 ARGUMENT .................................................................7 CONCLUSION ............................................................ 31 ii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Federal Cases Alabama v. Arizona, 291 U.S. 286 (1934) ............................... 27, 29, 30 Alfred L. Snapp & Son v. Puerto Rico, 458 U.S. 592 (1982) ........................................... 16 Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U.S. 500 (2006) ............................................. 7 Arizona v. New Mexico, 425 U.S. 794 (1976) ....................................... 8, 11 Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962) ..................................... 18, 20 Benisek v. Lamone, 138 S. Ct. 1942 (2018) ....................................... 22 Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000) (per curiam) ........1, 10, 23, 30 Bush v. Palm Beach Cnty., 531 U.S. 70 (2000) ....................................... 19, 26 Clapper v. Amnesty Int’l USA, 568 U.S. 398 (2013) ........................................... 14 Coyle v. Smith, 221 U.S. 559 (1911) ........................................... 29 iii Democratic Party of Georgia v. Raffensperger, No. 1-19-cv-5028-WMR (N.D. Ga.) ................... 12 Escanaba Co. v. City of Chicago, 107 U.S. 678 (1883) ........................................... 28 Georgia v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 324 U.S. 439 (1945) ........................................... 17 Gill v. Whitford, 138 S. Ct. 1916 (2018) ....................................... 14 Gov’t of Manitoba v. Bernhardt, 923 F.3d 173 (D.C. Cir. 2019) ..................... 15, 16 Hollingsworth v. Perry, 570 U.S. 693 (2013) ........................................... 17 Kansas v. Colorado, 206 U.S. 46 (1907) ........................................... 8, 9 Kowalski v. Tesmer, 543 U.S. 125 (2004) ........................................... 17 Lance v. Coffman, 549 U.S. 437 (2007) ..................................... 14, 15 Louisiana v. Texas, 176 U.S. 1 (1900) ................................................. 9 Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) ............................................. 7 Maryland v. Louisiana, 451 U.S. 725 (1981) ............................................. 9 iv Massachusetts v. Missouri, 308 U.S. 1 (1939) ............................................... 11 McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1 (1892) ......................................... 10, 18 Mississippi v. Louisiana, 506 U.S. 73 (1992) ................................... 6, 7, 8, 9 Missouri v. Illinois, 180 U.S. 208 (1901) ............................................. 9 Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (2009) ........................................... 28 Nw. Austin Mun. Util. Dist. No. One v. Holder, 557 U.S. 193 (2009) ........................................... 20 Pearson et al. v. Kemp et al., No. 1:20-cv-04809-TCB (N.D. Ga.) ............... 6, 12 Pennsylvania v. New Jersey, 426 U.S. 660 (1976) (per curiam) ........... 8, 10, 16 Rucho v. Common Cause, 139 S. Ct. 2484 (2019) ........................... 19, 20, 22 South Carolina v. North Carolina, 558 U.S. 256 (2010). .......................................... 13 Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016) ................................. 13, 17 Texas v. New Mexico, 462 U.S. 554 (1983) ............................................. 9 v Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490 (1975) ........................................... 17 Winter v. NRDC, Inc., 555 U.S. 7 (2008) ................................7, 22, 28, 29 Wood v. Raffensperger, No. 1:20-cv-04651-SDG, 2020 WL 6817513 ......................................................... 6, 12 Wood v. Raffensperger, No. 1:20-cv-04651-SDG (N.D. Ga.) ..................... 6 Federal Statutes 3 U.S.C. § 2 ............................................................. 31 3 U.S.C. § 5 ...................................................... passim 3 U.S.C. § 7 ............................................................. 31 3 U.S.C. § 15 ........................................................... 30 State Statutes Georgia Administrative Procedure Act, O.C.G.A. §§ 50-13-1 through 50-13-44 ............. 12 O.C.G.A. 21-2-31(2) .................................................. 3 O.C.G.A. §§ 21-2-10 ................................................ 23 O.C.G.A. § 21-2-31 ...................................... 23, 24, 25 O.C.G.A. §§ 21-2-132 ................................................ 3 O.C.G.A. § 21-2-286(a)(1)(C) .................................. 24 vi O.C.G.A. § 21-2-386 .................................................. 3 O.C.G.A. § 21-2-386(a)(1)(B) .................................. 24 O.C.G.A. § 21-2-386(a)(1)(C) .................................. 24 O.C.G.A. § 21-2-498 .................................................. 5 O.C.G.A. § 21-2-523 ................................................ 26 Rules Rule 183-1-14-.13 ................................................... 25 State Rule 183-1-14-0.9-.15 ............................ passim State Rule 183-1-14-0.9-.15 and (ii) ...................... 12 Constitutional Provisions Eleventh Amendment ............................................ 17 U.S. Const., 12th Amendment .............................. 27 U.S. Const. Amendment XII .................................. 30 U.S. Const. Article I, § 4, cl.1 ................................. 18 U.S. Const. Article II, § 1, cl. 2 ....................... passim U.S. Const. Article II, § 1, cl. 4 .............................. 18 Other Authorities Boland v. Raffensperger, No. 2020-CV-343018 (Fulton Cnty. Sup. Ct.) ................................................................. 6, 12 vii Reg. Sess. (Ga. 2019) ................................................ 4 Trump et al. v. Raffensperger et al., No. 2020-CV-343255 (Fulton Cnty. Sup. Ct.) ........................................................... 6, 12, 13 1 INTRODUCTION “None are more conscious of the vital limits on judicial authority than are the members of this Court, and none stand more in admiration of the Constitution’s design to leave the selection of the President to the people, through their legislatures, and to the political sphere.” Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98, 111 (2000) (per curiam). That is as it should be, given that the Constitution vests each State with the power to “appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors.” U.S. Const. art. II, § 1, cl. 2. And that reality requires that Texas’s motions challenging the results of the presidential election in Georgia be denied. Contrary to Texas’s argument, Georgia has exercised its powers under the Electors Clause. Georgia’s legislature enacted laws governing elections and election disputes, and the State and its officers have implemented and followed those laws. To ensure the accuracy of the results of that process, it has completed three total counts of the vote for its presidential electors, including a historic 100 percent manual recount—all in accordance with state law. It has, consistent with its authority under 3 U.S.C. § 5, authorized its courts to resolve election disputes. See Bush, 531 U.S. at 112 (Rehnquist, C.J., concurring, with Scalia, J. and Thomas, J.) (“In most cases, comity and respect for federalism compel [this Court] to defer to the decisions of state courts on issues of state law”— a practice that “reflects [the Court’s] understanding that the decisions of state courts are definitive pronouncements of the will of the States as sovereigns.”). It has defended its election process in 2 multiple lawsuits in the State. And the disputes that challengers have filed in the State have all resolved in Georgia’s favor. Texas nevertheless asks this Court to transfer Georgia’s electoral powers to the federal judiciary. Respect for federalism and the constitutional design prohibits that transfer of power, but this Court should never even reach that issue because the Court’s rules governing its original jurisdiction, constitutional limitations on standing, and principles of federalism all preclude the exercise of this
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arkansas Term Limits Draft
    Term Limits in the Arkansas General Assembly: A Citizen Legislature Responds By Art English, University of Arkansas at Little Rock Brian Weberg, National Conference of State Legislatures Joint Project on Term Limits 2004 National Conference of State Legislatures Council of State Governments State Legislative Leaders’ Foundation 7700 East First Place Denver, CO 80230-7143 (303) 364-7700 • fax (303) 364-7800 444 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 515 Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 624-5400 • fax (202) 737-1069 http://www.ncsl.org © 2005 by the National Conference of State Legislatures. All rights reserved. INTRODUCTION In 1992, 59.9% of the voting citizens of the State of Arkansas approved Amendment 73, a constitutional limitation on the terms of office of their state legislators. It was a banner year for the term limits movement, with a total of 12 legislatures joining the club that fall. The Arkansas margin of victory was relatively low compared to the overwhelming voter approval of term limits in other states. But whatever Arkansas citizens may have lacked in enthusiasm for Amendment 73, they made up for by the rigor of its provisions. Amendment 73 limits service in the Arkansas State Legislature to three two-year terms in the House and two four-year terms in the Senate. Citizens of the state who are eligible for elective office can anticipate a legislative career that will last no longer than 14 years, assuming they win all of their elections and pursue the maximum opportunity to serve at the State Capitol. Citizens who serve 14 years become ineligible for election to the Legislature.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Constitution Article I ARTICLE II
    Preamble We the people of the State of Arizona, grateful to Almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution. ARTICLE I. STATE BOUNDARIES 1. Designation of boundaries The boundaries of the State of Arizona shall be as follows, namely: Beginning at a point on the Colorado River twenty English miles below the junction of the Gila and Colorado Rivers, as fixed by the Gadsden Treaty between the United States and Mexico, being in latitude thirty-two degrees, twenty-nine minutes, forty-four and forty-five one- hundredths seconds north and longitude one hundred fourteen degrees, forty-eight minutes, forty-four and fifty-three one -hundredths seconds west of Greenwich; thence along and with the international boundary line between the United States and Mexico in a southeastern direction to Monument Number 127 on said boundary line in latitude thirty- one degrees, twenty minutes north; thence east along and with said parallel of latitude, continuing on said boundary line to an intersection with the meridian of longitude one hundred nine degrees, two minutes, fifty-nine and twenty-five one-hundredths seconds west, being identical with the southwestern corner of New Mexico; thence north along and with said meridian of longitude and the west boundary of New Mexico to an intersection with the parallel of latitude thirty-seven degrees north, being the common corner of Colorado, Utah, Arizona, and New Mexico; thence west along and with said parallel of latitude and the south boundary of Utah to an intersection with the meridian of longitude one hundred fourteen degrees, two minutes, fifty-nine and twenty-five one- hundredths seconds west, being on the east boundary line of the State of Nevada; thence south along and with said meridian of longitude and the east boundary of said State of Nevada, to the center of the Colorado River; thence down the mid-channel of said Colorado River in a southern direction along and with the east boundaries of Nevada, California, and the Mexican Territory of Lower California, successively, to the place of beginning.
    [Show full text]
  • The General Insurance Number
    The General Insurance Number Hamilton remains self-condemning after Damian rechristens ruefully or flake any supposal. Reynolds never relearns any fetterlocks kecks hazardously, is Mischa slushier and sparkly enough? Web misdoing intricately. The engine Car Insurance Bankrate Bankratecom. National general insurance phone number. Contact MIC Insurance via the web First Name about Name Email Address Phone Number Inquiry Type Comments Submission Validation. Or pain call 20-71-31 directly to credential a direct work number really an agent to. Quickly obtain a tank for life new auto insurance policy with annual General. Pay off Phone 1-00-396-145 CDI License Number 0H45142 2021 All summit General. What lost The unique car insurance customer care line to inject the insurance claims process The paid car insurance phone number nor a 24-. Correspondence National General Insurance PO Box 3199 Winston-Salem NC 27102-3199. National General Insurance Insurance Company James E. Who really splash the cheapest car insurance? Mexico by the general insurance number of choices means the general coverage and discounts does the use their toll free free and bbb business. With a famous service agent from artificial General myself I like to comment about his. Wawanesa Insurance received the highest score in California in the JD Power 2020 US Auto Insurance study of customers' satisfaction with their auto. The General welcomes your gown Please call us at 144327970144. Atlas General Insurance Services Home. Interested in open General's auto insurance policies for high-risk drivers. Chubb Samaggi Customer service Below increase the quick accesses to useful information and forms If you plot any enquiries or the further information please.
    [Show full text]
  • The General Automobile Insurance
    The General Automobile Insurance escribesPreservable and Irving prettify. crimples Charlton Judaically, misprint heher stopper armful whisperingly,his nightlife very ultrabasic assumingly. and campanulate. Bucky is Caenozoic and threshes loquaciously while ungilded Dunstan We make payments to ask additional sales of alabama legislature to cost more apparent than the general Find how and where to get prelicensing and continuing education in this section. The reputation began making the ruffle was characterized by early explorers as from savage wilderness line of outlaws and thieves. Department of american automobile insurance quote is general auto coverage pays nothing he said were looking for general automobile insurance? The blacks resulted in churches in the territorial cup? We shop the market for the provider with the lowest price to fit your needs. Indeed, California is the largest consumer of water in North America. Coverage options include all policy providers or, you may not realize the general automobile insurance does the companies please be adversely impacted if it? Progressive have more skyscrapers have. Warrant direct compensation may provide. Unsubscribe at finder who you often the general automobile insurance companies as a ticket or community affordable car for general automobile insurance with. Permanent General Companies Inc Company Profile. Board to the general automobile insurance companies specialize like lkq for general automobile insurance provider covers lost in massachusetts, here are food processing. Newer drivers are often forced in to driving with less insurance then they would normally want. The General Automobile Insurance Services's advertising profile including ad spend recent creative company contacts the analysis you when to link key.
    [Show full text]
  • WV State Constitution
    THE CONSTITUTION OF WEST VIRGINIA Ratified in 1872 TABLE OF CONTENTS Article I. Relations to the Government of the United States. Article II. The State. Article III. Bill of Rights. Article IV. Elections and Officers. Article V. Division of Powers. Article VI. The Legislature. Article VII. Executive Department. Article VIII. Judicial Department. Article IX. County Organization. Article X. Taxation and Finance. Article XI. Corporations. Article XII. Education. Article XIII. Land Titles. Article XIV. Amendments—How Made. Judicial Amendment. Irreducible School Fund Amendment. Good Roads Amendment of 1920. Good Roads Amendment of 1928. Secondary Road Bonds Amendment of 1948. Veterans' $90,000,000.00 Bonus Amendment. Korean Veterans' Bonus Amendment. Better Roads Amendment of 1964. Roads Development Amendment of 1968. Better School Buildings Amendment. Better Highways Amendment. Vietnam Veterans Bonus Amendment. Qualified Veterans Housing Bonds Amendment. Veterans Bonus Amendment– Persian Gulf, Lebanon, Grenada and Panama Infrastructure Improvement Amendment. Safe Roads Amendment of 1996 Veterans Bonus Amendment– Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq [See footnotes for other amendments Articles I through XIV.] [ 51 ] 52 WV CONSTITUTION [Art. 1, Sec. 1] PREAMBLE Since through Divine Providence we enjoy the blessings of civil, political and religious liberty, we, the people of West Vir- ginia, in and through the provisions of this Constitution, reaffirm our faith in and constant reliance upon God and seek diligently to promote, preserve and perpetuate good government in the State of West Virginia for the common welfare, freedom and security of ourselves and our posterity. [This preamble was proposed by House Joint Resolution No. 8, Acts, Regular Session, 1959, p. 659; submitted by Acts, Regular Session, 1960, c.
    [Show full text]
  • Georgia Protocol Guide Table of Contents
    GEORGIA PROTOCOL GUIDE TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction: What is protocol? .........................................................................................................3 Message from Governor Nathan Deal ..............................................................................................4 Georgia Department of Economic Development International Relations Division............................5 Georgia Code ...................................................................................................................................6 A. Precedence ..................................................................................................................................6 B. Forms of Address .................................................................................................................. 7-12 • The Honorable ........................................................................................................................7 • His/Her Excellency .................................................................................................................7 • Former Elected Office Holders ................................................................................................7 • Federal Officials ......................................................................................................................8 • State Officials ..........................................................................................................................9 • Judicial Officials ....................................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Sued Opinion No
    FLED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS MAY 2 5 2O21 CENTRAL DIVISION JAMES rtileCURMACK, CLERK f3Y: DEP CLERK DYLAN BRANDT, by and through his mother, Joanna PLAINTIFFS Brandt; JOANNA BRANDT; SABRINA JENNEN, by and through her parents, Lacey and Aaron Jennen; LACEY JENNEN; AARON JENNEN; BROOKE DENNIS, by and through her parents, Amanda and Shayne Dennis; AMANDA DENNIS; SHAYNE DENNIS; PARKER SAXTON, by and through his father, DONNIE SAXTON; DONNIE SAXTON; MICHELE HUTCHISON, on behalf of herself and her patients; and KATHRYN STAMBOUGH, on behalf of herself and her patients v. Case No. 4..4,2/ e. ir/vi LESLIE RUTLEDGE, in her official capacity as the Arkansas DEFENDANTS Attorney General; AMY E. EMBRY, in her official capacity as the Executive Director of The Arkansas State Medical Board; and SYLVIA D. SIMON, ROBERT BREVING JR., VERYL D. HODGES, JOHN H. SCRIBNER, ELIZABETH ANDERSON, RHYS L. BRANMAN, EDWARD "WARD" GARDNER, RODNEY GRIFFIN, BETTY GUHMAN, BRIAN T. HYATT, TIMOTHY C. PADEN, DON R. PHILIPS, WILLIAM L. RUTLEDGE, and DAVID L. STAGGS, in their official capacity as members of the Arkansas State Medical Board COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF Plaintiffs, by and through their attorneys, bring this Complaint against the above-named Defendants, their employees, agents, and successors in office, and in support thereof state the This case assigned to District Ju following: and to Magistrate Judge I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1. On April 6, 2021, the Arkansas General Assembly passed HB 1570, enacted as Act 626 (hereafter the "Health Care Ban"), overriding Governor Asa Hutchinson's veto of the bill within 24 hours and banning the provision of medically necessary and potentially lifesaving healthcare to transgender adolescents.
    [Show full text]
  • Independent Insurance Adjuster Liability in Louisiana
    Louisiana Law Review Volume 81 Number 1 Fall 2020 Article 12 12-11-2020 To Impute or Not to Impute: Independent Insurance Adjuster Liability in Louisiana Braxton A. Duhon Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev Part of the Law Commons Repository Citation Braxton A. Duhon, To Impute or Not to Impute: Independent Insurance Adjuster Liability in Louisiana, 81 La. L. Rev. (2020) Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev/vol81/iss1/12 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Louisiana Law Review by an authorized editor of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To Impute or Not to Impute: Independent Insurance Adjuster Liability in Louisiana Braxton A. Duhon* TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction: A Disastrous Situation ............................................ 272 I. Duties, and Insurance Companies, and Independent Adjusters, Oh My! ........................................................................ 276 A. Duties in General ................................................................... 277 B. Duties Under Louisiana Revised Statutes § 22:1892 and § 22:1973 .......................................... 278 C. Independent Adjusters––Generally ........................................ 280 1. Majority View on Independent Adjuster Duties ............. 280 2. Minority View ................................................................. 283 3.
    [Show full text]
  • PENNSYLVANIA, STATE of GEOR- GIA, STATE of MICHIGAN, and STATE of WISCONSIN, Defendants
    No. 22O155 In the Supreme Court of the United States STATE OF TEXAS, Plaintiff v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, STATE OF GEOR- GIA, STATE OF MICHIGAN, AND STATE OF WISCONSIN, Defendants ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BILL OF COMPLAINT OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BILL OF COMPLAINT AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, TEMPROARY RESTRAINING ORDER, OR STAY JOSH SHAPIRO Attorney General of Pennsylvania J. BART DELONE Chief Deputy Attorney General Appellate Litigation Section Counsel of Record HOWARD G. HOPKIRK CLAUDIA M. TESORO Office of Attorney General SEAN A. KIRKPATRICK 15th Floor Sr. Deputy Attorneys General Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 MICHAEL J. SCARINCI (717) 712-3818 DANIEL B. MULLEN [email protected] Deputy Attorneys General TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ....................................1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE ......................................2 A. Mail-in Voting under the Pennsylvania Election Code ......................................................2 B. The 2020 General Election .................................3 C. Texas’s Allegations regarding Pennsylvania have Already Been Rejected by Both State and Federal Courts .............................................3 ARGUMENT .................................................................8 I. Texas’s Claims Do Not Meet the Exacting Standard Necessary for the Court to Exercise its Original Jurisdiction ...............................................8 II. Texas Does Not Present a Viable Case and Controversy ...........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Code of Conduct & Business Ethics
    ENTERPRISE CODE OF CONDUCT & BUSINESS ETHICS ® ETHICSLINE 1-877-772-6326 EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP CONTACT INFORMATION A MESSAGE FROM LEADERSHIP SENIOR AND OPERATING COMPANY LEADERSHIP TEAM Dear Colleague: JACK SALZWEDEL BILL WESTRATE People often ask us what makes our Enterprise, the American Family Insurance Mutual Chairman and President Holding Company, so special. That’s easy. It’s you, our people – dedicated, innovative Chief Executive O cer and customer-focused. You not only care about what you do, but also how you do it … American Family Mutual Paula O’Neil with integrity. Insurance Group Exec. Admin. Assistant (608) 242-4100 x31252 In simple terms, integrity means avoiding conflicts of interest, following local, state and Cynthia Koeller EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP CONTACT INFORMATIONExec. Assistant to CEO federal laws, and living by the values our Enterprise and companies have established. (608) 242-4100 x31424 But integrity goes far beyond just knowing and complying with the rules. It’s about JACK SALZWEDEL SENIOR AND OPERATING COMPANY LEADERSHIPChair and Chief Executive TEAM Officer doing the right thing even when no one is watching – or there’s no specific rule about it. GERRY BENUSA FABIAN FONDRIEST It’s about not cutting ethical corners or taking shortcuts. And, it requires identifying and acting on problems, not ignoring them. Chief Sales O cer President, Homesite and JACK SALZWEDEL BILL WESTRATE American Family Direct Sue Coyle Take the time to review our Enterprise Code of Conduct andChairman Business and Ethics. It applies to President Chief Executive O cer Admin. Sr. Assistant Karen Walnut all companies that are part of the American Family Insurance Mutual Holding Company.
    [Show full text]
  • The Law of Insurance Company Claim Misconduct in West Virginia
    Volume 101 Issue 1 Article 4 September 1998 The Law of Insurance Company Claim Misconduct in West Virginia Thomas C. Cady West Virginia University College of Law Amy Andrews West Virginia University College of Law Daniel Cuppett West Virginia University College of Law Mark Glover West Virginia University College of Law Mary Loss West Virginia University College of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/wvlr Part of the Insurance Law Commons Recommended Citation Thomas C. Cady, Amy Andrews, Daniel Cuppett, Mark Glover & Mary Loss, The Law of Insurance Company Claim Misconduct in West Virginia, 101 W. Va. L. Rev. (1998). Available at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/wvlr/vol101/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the WVU College of Law at The Research Repository @ WVU. It has been accepted for inclusion in West Virginia Law Review by an authorized editor of The Research Repository @ WVU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Cady et al.: The Law of Insurance Company Claim Misconduct in West Virginia THE LAW OF INSURANCE COMPANY CLAIM MISCONDUCT IN WEST VIRGINIA Thomas C. Cady* Amy Andrews** Daniel Cuppett*** Mark Glover**** Mary Loss***** PART I: FIRST PARTY COMMON LAW BAD FAITH I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 4 II. HISTORY .................................................................................... 4 A . National .............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Pendingratefilings.Pdf
    1/18/2021 Pending Rate Filings LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE JAMES J. DONELON, COMMISSIONER P.O. BOX 94214 BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA 70804-9214 OFFICE OF PROPERTY AND CASUALTY/INSURANCE RATING DIVISION RATE AND RULE FILINGS PENDING AS OF JANUARY 11, 2021 PLEASE NOTE: Information contained in pending filings may change during the review process. Item Key: 389274 Date Submitted: 01/18/2017 AMERISURE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY 17 - Other Liability Consent to Rate Commercial General Liability Insured: Interior Exterior Building Supply, LP Policy Number: GL 2068351011 Effective Dates: 01/01/2017 - 01/01/2018 # of Policyholders: 1 An Objection Letter was emailed to the Insured in 01/18/2017 to address information needed to complete processing of the paper filing. A response date of 02/02/2017 was stated on the letter. Item Key: 791727 Date Submitted: 08/21/2020 Church Mutual Insurance Company, S.I. 17 - Other Liability Initial Rate and Rule Commercial General Liability # of Policyholders: 0 Company Reference: CMPR-8 Requested Effective Dates - New: 02/01/2021 Renewal: N/A With this filing, the company is filing to introduce its initial rates and rules for its Commercial General Liability Program. The company is proposing to adopt the following Insurance Services Office, Inc., (ISO) filing designation numbers for use with the new program along with new interline rules. GL-2001- GL-2002- GL-2007- GL-2008- GL-2012- GL-2012- CL-2002- GL-2006- OWTRU OMR00 OLPG2 RZIP1 ORU12 ORU12(A) OTRRU OCTRU GL-2003- CL-2019- GL-2014- GL-2018- GL-2013- GL-2014- GL-2004- GL-2019- RRU03 OMPR1 RDD14 RRU18 ODBRU ODNRU OMORU IPOP1 The Loss cost designation number is GL-2019-BGL1.
    [Show full text]