main image

Philip J. Loree Jr.

Philip J. Loree Jr. has 20 years of experience litigating and arbitrating complex reinsurance- and insurance-related disputes, counseling clients in reinsurance and insurance matters, and handling matters arising under the Federal Arbitration Act. Before forming Loree & Loree in 2008 he practiced for nearly 17 years with one of the leading reinsurance practice groups in the United States, and was a partner in the Litigation Departments of Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP and Rosenman & Colin LLP. He was also a shareholder in the Litigation Department of Stevens & Lee, P.C.

He has extensive experience arbitrating and litigating matters involving nearly every significant, reinsurance-related issue, including statutory and GAAP reinsurance accounting; transfer of insurance risk; independent auditor liability; fraud and rescission; London Market disputes; pool administration; insolvencies; follow-the-fortunes and follow-the-settlements; allocation of environmental liability and asbestos settlements; number of occurrences; trigger of coverage; issues arising out of multi-year policies; interpretation of reinsurance contracts and insurance policies; underwriting practices; reserving; set off; late notice; pre-hearing and pre-answer security; utmost good faith; bad faith; allocation and recovery of declaratory judgment expenses; and liability of intermediaries, managing general agents and brokers. He has also handled coverage litigation. He has counseled clients in contentious and non-contentious matters involving insurance coverage; regulatory compliance; Hurricane Katrina; commutations; internal reinsurance reviews; contract and policy interpretation; life reinsurance; life settlements; risk transfer; and other issues.

As a partner at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft he played key roles in a number of high-profile matters. He was a member of the four-partner trial team that obtained a $1.1 billion arbitration award in favor of a large, Japanese insurance and reinsurance company against Fortress Re, Inc., the manager of what was once one of the world’s largest aviation reinsurance pools. The arbitration concerned, among other things, Fortress Re’s accounting and reporting practices for financial reinsurance, and the $1.1 billion award is reputed to be the largest in the history of reinsurance arbitration. He was also a key member of the team that represented the same Japanese insurance and reinsurance company in the related action it brought against Deloitte & Touche, LLP, the independent auditor of the Fortress Re Pool, seeking more than $1 billion in damages. That matter resulted in what was reputed to be the second largest settlement of an independent auditor liability case in history (and may still be). He and his former partners also represented a large, international reinsurance company in an internal review of finite reinsurance transactions that resulted in a restatement of earnings.

Mr. Loree also has extensive experience and expertise in practice and procedure under the Federal Arbitration Act, including matters arising under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, and is a recognized expert on U.S. arbitration-law matters. He has represented clients in numerous proceedings involving the enforcement of arbitration agreements and the confirmation and vacatur of arbitration awards. He argued Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Home Ins. Co., 429 F.3d 640 (6th Cir. 2005), which rejected an evident partiality and excess of powers challenge to a favorable award he helped his client obtain. Considering for the first time what legal standard should apply to an evident partiality challenge based on a party-appointed arbitrator’s alleged failure to disclose purported conflicts of interest, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit rejected the challenging party’s argument that the district court applied the wrong standard. Nationwide has been cited extensively by courts, treatises and commentators.

As a Loree & Loree partner he obtained on behalf of an English client partial vacatur of a reinsurance arbitration award in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The final award included a provision stating that the arbitration panel would remain constituted until the parties agreed that it should disband. When the arbitration panel would not disband after resolving all issues the parties submitted to it, his client petitioned the Court for an order vacating the retention-of-jurisdiction provision and confirming all other aspects of the award. He successfully convinced the Court to grant the petition in its entirety, and hold that the retention-of-jurisdiction provision exceeded the arbitrators’ authority under Section 10(a)(4) of the Federal Arbitration Act. See KX Re Co. v. General Reinsurance Corp., 08 Civ. 7807 (SAS), 2008 WL 4904882 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 14, 2008) (Scheindlin, J.).

He has written extensively on reinsurance and commercial arbitration matters, and is blogmaster of the Loree Reinsurance and Arbitration Law Forum (, which regularly posts online articles of interest concerning reinsurance and commercial and industry arbitration and mediation. His comments on two important arbitration decisions were recently quoted in two articles by Global Arbitration Review, a London-based trade publication that covers international arbitration, and, more recently, he was quoted in Business Insurance (two articles) and U.S. Law Week.

He also owns and co-manages with other ADR professionals LinkedIn’s Commercial and Industry Arbitration and Mediation Group (, which is over 900 members strong (and still growing), and whose members include U.S. and international arbitrators, mediators, law professors, attorneys and industry people from a number of sectors, including the insurance and reinsurance industry. He also owns and co-manages with other insurance and reinsurance professionals the recently-formed LinkedIn Reinsurance Claims group, which focuses on issues pertinent to reinsurance claims in the domestic and international markets, and which is now more than 100 members strong.

His hard copy publications include:

  • Philip J. Loree Jr., Stolt-Nielsen Delivers a New FAA Rule – And then Federalizes the Law of Contracts, Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation (Newsletter of the International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution (CPR)), 28 Alternatives 121 (June 2010)
  • Philip J. Loree Jr., It’s Time for Doctrines: The Supreme Court Wrestles with “Severability” and the “Clear and Unmistakable” Standard, Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation (Newsletter of the International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution (CPR)), 28 Alternatives 73 (March 2010)
  • Philip J. Loree Jr., KX Reinsurance Co. v. General Reinsurance Corp.: Can Arbitrators Retain Jurisdiction after Resolving all Submitted Issues?, AIRROC Matters, Vol. 5, No. 1, at 26 (Spring 2009) (
  • Philip J. Loree Jr. & Costas Frangeskides, Arbitration Practice and Procedure in U.S. and U.K. Reinsurance Disputes: Is the Grass any Greener on the Other Side of the Pond?, AIRROC Matters, Vol. 4 No. 1, at 24 (Spring 2008) (Part 1) & Vol. 4 No. 2, at 28 (Fall 2008) (Part 2) ( (Part 1) and (Part 2))
  • Philip J. Loree Jr. & Keith R. Wesolowski, Settling the Standards for Neutral’s Impartiality, National Law Journal (May 15, 2006) (
  • Philip J. Loree Jr., Dealing with the NAIC’s New Certification Requirements, U.S. Insurer (August/September 2005)
  • Philip J. Loree Jr. & Nancy K. Eisner, Acting on Sarbox, Global Reinsurance (April 1, 2004) (

He attended New York University (B.A. 1986) and Brooklyn Law School (J.D. 1989), where he was editor-in-chief of the Brooklyn Journal of International Law. He is admitted to practice in New York, and in the United States District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut and the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.