Philip J. Loree, Jr.

Philip J. Loree Jr. is the principal of The Loree Law Firm. He has 30 years of experience representing clients in complex disputes before federal and state trial and appellate courts, and arbitration panels, particularly in domestic and international arbitration-law, reinsurance, insurance, and other business and commercial disputes.

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 litigation partner at two prominent New York City law firms, Rosenman & Colin LLP (now Katten-Muchin Rosenman LLP) and Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP. When Philip J. Loree Sr. retired from the practice of law in 2020, Philip J. Loree Jr. (“Mr. Loree” or “Loree”) continued the practice of Loree & Loree as The Loree Law Firm. 

Mr. Loree 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; multi-year policy issues; 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; Office of Foreign Asset Control (“OFAC”) sanctions; reinsurance or insurance coverage for hurricane or storm damage; commutations; internal reinsurance reviews; contract and policy interpretation; Bermuda Form polices; property insurance, including insurance of a major oil rig; life reinsurance; life settlements; risk transfer; and other issues.

He has also represented and counseled clients in arbitration and litigation concerning commercial and business contracts, business torts, and fraudulent transfers.   

As a partner at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP 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 at the time reputed to be the second largest settlement of an independent auditor liability case in history. 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 commentator 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 arising out of industry, commercial, business contract, employment, and trust arbitrations.

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. Courts, treatises and commentators have cited Nationwide extensively.

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 provided 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).

Loree argued on behalf of the prevailing party Certain Underwriting Members of Lloyds of London v. State of Florida, Department of Financial Services, 892 F.3d 501, 503-04 (2d Cir. 2018) in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that “a party seeking to vacate an award under Section 10(a)(2) must sustain a higher burden to prove evident partiality on the part of an arbitrator who is appointed by a party and who is expected to espouse the view or perspective of the appointing party.” Id. “An undisclosed relationship between a party and its party- appointed arbitrator constitutes evident partiality, such that vacatur of the award is appropriate if[,]” explained the Court: “(1) the relationship violates the contractual requirement of disinterestedness [or another contractual requirement of the arbitration agreement]; or (2) it prejudicially affects the award.” 892 F.3d at 504 (citations omitted). (Read more about the case here.)

Loree is a prolific and skilled writer. He has written extensively on reinsurance and arbitration-related matters, and is the editor-in-chief of the Arbitration Law Forum (formerly the Loree Reinsurance and Arbitration Law Forum) (http://www.LoreeLawFirm.com/blog), which regularly posts online articles of interest concerning reinsurance and commercial and industry arbitration. In addition to the more than 300 articles he has published in The Arbitration Law Forum (and in its predecessor, the Loree Reinsurance and Arbitration Law Forum), he has written articles published in the New York Law Journal, the National Law Journal, U.S. Insurer, Global Reinsurer, and other publications, as well as several articles for Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation, the newsletter of the International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (“CPR”).

Mr. Loree’s publications include:

• Richard D. Faulkner & Philip J. Loree Jr., Why the U.S. Supreme Court Should Review Whether Arbitrability May Be Incorporated by Reference, Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation (Newsletter of the International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR)), 38 Alternatives 87 (June 2020) (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/alt.21844).
• Richard D. Faulkner & Philip J. Loree Jr., Schein’s Remand Decision: Should Scotus Review the Provider Rule Incorporation-by-Reference Issue?, Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation (Newsletter of the International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR)), 38 Alternatives 70 (May 2020) (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/alt.21839).
• Philip J. Loree Jr., Schein’s Remand Decision Goes Back to the Supreme Court. What’s Next?, Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation (Newsletter of the International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR)), 38 Alternatives 54 (March 2020) (https://bit.ly/3aYy7Sg).
• Philip J. Loree Jr., Back to Scotus's Schein: A Separability Analysis that Resolves the Problem with the Fifth Circuit's Remand, Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation (Newsletter of the International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR)), 37 Alternatives 131 (Oct. 2019) (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/alt.21808).
• Philip J. Loree Jr., Scotus Introduces a New Federal Arbitration Act Presumption Against Consent to Class Arbitration, Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation (Newsletter of the International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR)), 37 Alternatives 83 (June 2019) (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alt.21793).
• Philip J. Loree Jr., The First Circuit Reinstates an Award, With Questions On ADR, Statutes of Limitations, and Choice of Law, Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation (Newsletter of the International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR)), 33 Alternatives 83 (June 2015) (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alt.21586).
• Philip J. Loree Jr., Arbitrator Evident Partiality Standard Under Scrutiny in Scandinavian Re, New York Law Journal (May 18, 2011) (http://loreelawfirm.com/blog/new-york-law-journal-article-arbitrator-evident-partiality-standard-under-scrutiny-in-scandinavian-re).
• Donald R. Philbin Jr., Audrey L. Maness, and Philip J Loree Jr., Litigating Arbitration Slows as Mediation Becomes More Popular, 43 Texas Tech Law Review 757 (2011) (http://www.adrtoolbox.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Alternative-Dispute-Resolution-Litigation-Arbitration-Slows-as-Mediation-Becomes-More-Popular-2011.pdf).
• Philip J. Loree Jr., Arbitrator Evident Partiality and the Duty to Disclose, HarrisMartin Reinsurance Report, Vol. 3, Issue No. 11 (April 2011) (https://harrismartin.com/article/13244/arbitrator-evident-partiality-and-the-duty-to-disclose/).
• Philip J. Loree Jr., Should States Regulate the Mediation Profession?, NE-ACR News (Newsletter of the New England Chapter of the Association for Conflict Resolution) (Winter 2010-2011) (https://neacr.wildapricot.org/Resources/Documents/2010%20newsletters/Winter%202010-2011.pdf)
• Philip J. Loree Jr., Despite Granite Rock's Procedural Dodge, Court Issues a Straightforward Decision on Bargaining Agreements, Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation (Newsletter of the International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution (CPR)), 28 Alternatives 175 (October 2010) (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alt.v28:9/issuetoc).
• Philip J. Loree Jr., Rent-A-Center's Roadmap Extends Beyond Contracts. . . To Congress and the Supreme Court's New Term, Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation (Newsletter of the International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution (CPR)), 28 Alternatives 153 (Sept. 2010) (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alt.20321/abstract).
• 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) (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alt.20319/abstract).
• 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 Alternatives73 (March 2010) (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/alt.20316).
• 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) (http://www.airroc.org/files/AIRROC_Spring_2009.pdf).
• 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).
• 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).

CPR conducted in 2020 several video conference interviews of Loree, and his friend, former trial judge, and fellow arbitration-law practitioner, Richard D. Faulkner, about various controversial arbitration issues pertaining to matters the U.S. Supreme Court either has been asked to hear. Links to those videos can be accessed here.

Mr. Loree’s speaking engagements include:

• American Conference Institute, 13th National Forum on Insurance Regulation, February 27-28th, 2017, New York, New York, Panelist, Emerging Developments in Cyber Security, Cyber Governance and Cyber Insurance, The Latest on the NAIC’s Cybersecurity Model Law and New York’s New Cybersecurity Regulations Applicable to Insurance Companies, and Best Practices for Getting Your Cybersecurity Policies and Procedures in Line with New Requirements.
• American Conference Institute, 12^th National Forum on Insurance Regulation, July 25 - 26, 2016, New York, NY, Panelist, Regulation of Big Data and Its Use by Insurance Companies in Underwriting, Claims Handling, and Pricing.
• Industry Essentials, Panelist, New York Reinsurance 101, New York, New York, October 8, 2015.
• American Conference Institute, Advanced Forum on Reinsurance Regulation, New York, New York, July 29-30, 2014, Panelist, Reinsurance Boot Camp Part I (Dispute Resolution): What Those Who Practice in the Regulatory and Legislative Aspects of the Industry Now Need to Know Regarding Arbitration and Litigation of Key Reinsurance Issues.
• American Conference Institute, Advanced Forum on Reinsurance Disputes in Litigation and Arbitration, New York, New York, April 30 – May 1, 2012, Panelist, Procedural Challenges to Arbitration Proceedings and Federal Arbitration Act Disputes: Incorporating the Latest Developments Into Your Reinsurance Dispute Strategy.
• HarrisMartin Publishing, Reinsurance Summit: Fresh Perspectives on the Reinsurance Front, The Judicial Scrutiny of Arbitral Awards (Sept. 2011).
• Holman Fenwick Willan, US/UK Reinsurance Arbitration Seminar: Reinsurance Arbitration—Approaching Things Differently Either Side of the "Pond,” London, 2009.

The Loree Law Firm’s predecessor practice, Loree & Loree, was selected by Expertise.com out of a group of 1,763 persons or firms reviewed as one of Expertise.com’s top 18 “Arbitrators & Mediators” in New York City for 2019, and now for 2020. (See here and here.)

His comments on arbitration matters have been quoted by Global Arbitration Review, a London-based trade publication that covers international arbitration; Business Insurance, and U.S. Law Week.

Loree obtained his B.A. from New York University in 1986 and his J.D. from Brooklyn Law School in 1989, where he was the Editor-in-Chief of the Brooklyn Journal of International Law, a Dean’s Merit Scholar, and a member of the Dean’s List.

He is admitted to practice in the State of 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 Courts of Appeals for the Second, Sixth, and Eighth Circuits.