XML 33 R22.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.23.3

LITIGATION AND OTHER LEGAL PROCEEDINGS | 9 Months Ended
--- | ---
Sep. 30, 2023
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
LITIGATION AND OTHER LEGAL PROCEEDINGS | LITIGATION AND OTHER LEGAL PROCEEDINGS Legal Proceedings The Company and its subsidiaries are involved in various legal actions in the normal course of business, in which claims for compensatory and punitive damages are asserted, some for substantial amounts. We recognize an estimated loss from these loss contingencies when we believe it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Some of the pending matters have been filed as purported class actions and some actions have been filed in certain jurisdictions that permit punitive damage awards that are disproportionate to the actual damages incurred. The amounts sought in certain of these actions are often large or indeterminate and the ultimate outcome of certain actions is difficult to predict. In the event of an adverse outcome in one or more of these matters, there is a possibility that the ultimate liability may be in excess of the liabilities we have established and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In addition, the resolution of pending or future litigation may involve modifications to the terms of outstanding insurance policies or could impact the timing and amount of rate increases, which could adversely affect the future profitability of the related insurance policies. Based upon information presently available, and in light of legal, factual and other defenses available to the Company and its subsidiaries, the Company does not believe that it is probable that the ultimate liability from either pending or threatened legal actions, after consideration of existing loss provisions, will have a material adverse effect on the Company's consolidated financial condition, operating results or cash flows. However, given the inherent difficulty in predicting the outcome of legal proceedings, there exists the possibility that such legal actions could have a material adverse effect on the Company's consolidated financial condition, operating results or cash flows. In addition to the inherent difficulty of predicting litigation outcomes, particularly those that will be decided by a jury, some matters purport to seek substantial or an unspecified amount of damages for unsubstantiated conduct spanning several years based on complex legal theories and damages models. The alleged damages typically are indeterminate or not factually supported in the complaint, and, in any event, the Company's experience indicates that monetary demands for damages often bear little relation to the ultimate loss. In some cases, plaintiffs are seeking to certify classes in the litigation and class certification either has been denied or is pending and we have filed oppositions to class certification or sought to decertify a prior class certification. In addition, for many of these cases: (i) there is uncertainty as to the outcome of pending appeals or motions; (ii) there are significant factual issues to be resolved; and/or (iii) there are novel legal issues presented. Accordingly, the Company cannot reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss in excess of amounts accrued, if any, or predict the timing of the eventual resolution of these matters. The Company reviews these matters on an ongoing basis. When assessing reasonably possible and probable outcomes, the Company bases its assessment on the expected ultimate outcome following all appeals. On April 9, 2019, Bankers Conseco Life Insurance Company ("BCLIC") and Washington National commenced an action entitled Bankers Conseco Life Insurance Company and Washington National Insurance Company v. Wilmington Trust, National Association, in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Commercial Division (the "Wilmington Action"). BCLIC and Washington National seek an unspecified amount of damages, costs, attorney's fees, and other relief as the court deems appropriate. In the Wilmington Action, BCLIC and Washington National assert claims against Wilmington Trust, National Association ("Wilmington") for breaching its express contractual obligations under four trust agreements pursuant to which Wilmington was the trustee in regard to trust assets ceded as part of reinsurance agreements with Beechwood Re Ltd. ("BRe"), as well as for breaching its fiduciary duties to BCLIC and Washington National. The Court granted Wilmington's motion to dismiss this litigation. BCLIC and Washington National appealed the Court's decision. On April 20, 2021, the New York Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First Judicial Department unanimously reversed the trial court and reinstated breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty claims against Wilmington. The case has been resolved by settlement and dismissed. On June 7, 2019, the Joint Official Liquidators of Platinum Partners Value Arbitrage Fund L.P. (in Official Liquidation) and Principal Growth Strategies, LLC, commenced suit against, among others, CNO Financial Group, Inc., BCLIC, Washington National and 40|86 Advisors, Inc. (collectively, the "CNO Parties") in Delaware Chancery Court. Plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of damages, costs, attorney's fees, and other relief as the court deems appropriate. Plaintiffs allege that the CNO Parties were unjustly enriched when they terminated BCLIC and Washington National's reinsurance agreements with BRe and recaptured assets from reinsurance trusts, in particular, Agera securities. Plaintiffs contend that the Agera securities were fraudulently transferred to the reinsurance trusts by other Platinum-related entities and they are seeking to claw back those Agera securities, or the value of those assets, from the CNO Parties. The CNO Parties are vigorously contesting the plaintiff's claims. The CNO Parties had removed the case to the United States District Court for the District of Delaware but on April 6, 2020, the District Court granted the plaintiff's motion to remand the case back to the Delaware Chancery Court. Plaintiffs have filed an Amended Complaint and the CNO Parties have moved to dismiss the Amended Complaint. The Delaware Chancery Court denied the CNO Parties’ motions to dismiss the Amended Complaint on the basis of forum non conveniens, but granted the CNO Parties’ motion to stay the case pending the conclusion of a related matter. After the stay is lifted, the court will address the CNO Parties’ and other defendants’ motions to dismiss the Amended Complaint on numerous other grounds. On June 28, 2019, BCLIC and Washington National commenced an action entitled Bankers Conseco Life Insurance Company and Washington National Insurance Company v. KPMG LLP, in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Commercial Division (the "KPMG Action"). BCLIC and Washington National seek an unspecified amount of damages, costs, attorney's fees, and other relief as the court deems appropriate. In the KPMG Action, BCLIC and Washington National assert claims against KPMG LLP ("KPMG") for aiding and abetting fraud, constructive fraud and negligent misrepresentation arising from KPMG's alleged role in the Platinum Partners' scheme to defraud BCLIC and Washington National into reinsuring its long-term care business with BRe. The Court granted KPMG’s motion to dismiss this litigation. BCLIC and Washington National appealed the Court's decision. On December 1, 2020, the New York Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First Judicial Department unanimously reversed the trial court and reinstated the aiding and abetting claim against KPMG. The case has been resolved by settlement and dismissed. On October 5, 2012, plaintiffs William Jeffrey Burnett and Joe H. Camp commenced an action entitled Burnett v. Conseco Life Ins. Co. against, among others, CNO Financial Group, Inc. and CNO Services, LLC (collectively, the "CNO Entities") in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of a putative class of former interest-sensitive whole life insurance policyholders who surrendered their policies or let them lapse. Plaintiffs' first amended complaint alleges that the CNO Entities are liable under an alter ego theory for Conseco Life Insurance Company's purported breach of the optional premium payment provision (the "Optional Premium Payment") of plaintiffs' insurance policies. In January 2018, the case was transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. On August 17, 2020, the Court denied the CNO Entities' motions to dismiss. On January 13, 2021, the Court granted final approval of a class action settlement between plaintiffs and co-defendant Conseco Life Insurance Company (n/k/a Wilco Life Insurance Company). The case remains pending against the CNO Entities. On March 25, 2022, the Court certified a Rule 23(b)(3) class of under 2,000 policyholders who invoked the policy's Optional Premium Payment prior to October 2008 and who surrendered their policies between October 7, 2008 and September 1, 2011. The Court's certification order acknowledged the existence of individualized issues of causation and damages, which the Court stated could be addressed in individualized proceedings following a class trial on the alter ego allegations and the meaning of the subject insurance policy language. The CNO Entities continue to vigorously defend the case. Regulatory Examinations and Fines Insurance companies face significant risks related to regulatory investigations and actions. Regulatory investigations generally result from matters related to sales or underwriting practices, payment of contingent or other sales commissions, claim payments and procedures, product design, product disclosure, additional premium charges for premiums paid on a periodic basis, denial or delay of benefits, charging excessive or impermissible fees on products, procedures related to canceling policies, changing the way cost of insurance charges are calculated for certain life insurance products or recommending unsuitable products to customers. We are, in the ordinary course of our business, subject to various examinations, inquiries and information requests from state, federal and other authorities. The ultimate outcome of these regulatory actions (including the costs of complying with information requests and policy reviews) cannot be predicted with certainty. In the event of an unfavorable outcome in one or more of these matters, the ultimate liability may be in excess of liabilities we have established and we could suffer significant reputational harm as a result of these matters, which could also have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for loss and gain contingencies. Describes any existing condition, situation, or set of circumstances involving uncertainty as of the balance sheet date (or prior to issuance of the financial statements) as to a probable or reasonably possible loss incurred by an entity that will ultimately be resolved when one or more future events occur or fail to occur, and typically discloses the amount of loss recorded or a range of possible loss, or an assertion that no reasonable estimate can be made. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section S99 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (SAB Topic 5.Y.Q2) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//1943274/2147480102/450-20-S99-1 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//1943274/2147483076/450-20-50-1 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section S99 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (SAB Topic 5.Y.Q4) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//1943274/2147480102/450-20-S99-1 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//450-20/tableOfContent Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//1943274/2147483076/450-20-50-4 Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 9 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//1943274/2147483076/450-20-50-9 Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 450 -SubTopic 30 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//450-30/tableOfContent Reference 8: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 450 -SubTopic 30 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//1943274/2147483049/450-30-50-1 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_LossContingencyDisclosures
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration