QBE Insurance Corporation v. Starwood Management, LLC

Filing 23

JUDGMENT in favor of QBE Insurance Corporation and against Starwood Management, LLC. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 3/20/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

Case 2:12-cv-01800-MMD-VCF Document 22 Filed 03/19/13 Page 1 of 4

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

* ** *

9
10
11

QBE INSURANCE CORPORATION,
Case No. 2:12-cv-01800-MMD-VCF
Plaintiff,

12
13

vs.

14

STARWOOD MANAGEMENT, LLC, doing
business as, STARWOOD MANAGEMENT,
INC., and DOES I through X, inclusive.
_____________________________________/

15
16
17
18

QBE INSURANCE CORPORATION, defendant, and STARWOOD MANAGEMENT,
LLC doing business as, STARWOOD MANAGEMENT, INC., have stipulated to entry of a
declaratory relief judgment.

19
20
21
22
23

IT IS HEREBY THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED, that a
declaratory judgment shall be entered in the above-entitled action as allowed by NRS 17.100 and
17.010 with no allowance of any attorney’s fees or costs whatsoever, and pursuant to the parties’
21
19
stipulation for entry of judgment, Document No. ___, dated March ____, 2013, that this Court finds

as follows:

24
25
26
27
28

JUDGMENT

1. Plaintiff, QBE Insurance Corporation (“QBE”) at all times relevant to this action was
and is an admitted property-casualty insurer in the State of Nevada.
///
///

Case 2:12-cv-01800-MMD-VCF Document 22 Filed 03/19/13 Page 2 of 4

1

2. Defendant Starwood Management, LLC (“Starwood”), is a limited liability company

2

organized and existing under laws of the State of Nevada, and has its principal place of business

3

at 3540 West Sahara Avenue, Suite 202, Las Vegas, Nevada 89102-5816. Starwood Management,

4

LLC, also uses and does business under the fictitious name, Starwood Management, Inc.

5

3. This court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§1332 and 1441 (a). There is complete

6

diversity of citizenship between QBE (a New York corporation principally located in New York),

7

and Starwood (a Nevada limited liability company principally located in Las Vegas, Nevada). The

8

amount in controversy, exclusive of interest and costs, exceeds the sum of $75,000.

9

4. Venue is proper in the District of Nevada pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391, because the QBE

10

Policy was issued to Starwood at its Las Vegas, Nevada address, and the 1977 Hawker 700 aircraft

11

was registered to Starwood at its Las Vegas, Nevada address.

12

5. QBE issued its Comprehensive Corporate Aircraft Policy No. QAV0000661 to Starwood

13

Management, Inc., as the named insured effective July 27, 2012 through July 27, 2013 (the QBE

14

Policy).

15

6. The Starwood Policy afforded Physical Damage Coverage covering three Scheduled

16

Aircraft. One of these Scheduled Aircraft was Aircraft, N98FT, a Hawker 700 jet aircraft. A

17

correct copy of the Starwood Policy is attached to the complaint as Exhibit “A”. A true, authentic

18

and correct copy of the Federal Aviation Administration Aircraft Registration Report for N98FT

19

is attached to the complaint as Exhibit “C”.

20

7. Coverage was bound prior to Starwood’s actual submission of the required written

21

application for the Policy. QBE made submission of a completed written application a condition

22

of continued coverage under the QBE Policy. Starwood submitted to QBE an application dated

23

August 10, 2012, for the Policy that was signed on Starwood’s behalf. A true and correct copy of

24

this application is attached to the complaint as Exhibit “D”.

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

///
2

Case 2:12-cv-01800-MMD-VCF Document 22 Filed 03/19/13 Page 3 of 4

1

8. The responses of Starwood to the questions in this application for the Policy (Exhibit

2

“D” to the complaint), contained inaccurate information. Had the application contained accurate

3

information, QBE would have declined to issue a policy to Starwood and/or would have rescinded

4

the Policy upon receipt of Starwood’s application.

5
6

9. On September 12, 2012, United States Marshals, confiscated the Starwood Hawker 700
Aircraft after it landed at the McAllen, Texas airport on a flight from Mexico.

7

10. QBE was unaware that the policy application contained inaccurate information until

8

after September 5, 2012, when it conducted its investigation of Starwood’s claim arising from the

9

confiscation of the Subject Aircraft by the United States Marshals.

10

11. These facts entitle QBE to rescind the QBE Policy pursuant to NRS 687B.110, because

11

the inaccurate information constitute acts increasing the hazard insured against, and constitute

12

inaccurate material information to obtain the QBE Policy and in the presentation of Starwood’s

13

QBE claim under the QBE Policy arising from the confiscation of the Hawker 700 Aircraft by the

14

United States Marshals.

15
16

12. On September 14, 2012, by letter to Starwood, Exhibit “B” to the Complaint, QBE
rescinded the QBE Policy and confirmed that Starwood had not paid any premium to QBE.

17

13. QBE and Starwood do hereby agree that the QBE Policy is rescinded effective

18

September 14, 2012. The parties, QBE and Starwood, further agree Starwood has no benefits due

19

or available under the QBE policy and that QBE has no obligation whatsoever toward Starwood.

20

14. Declaratory judgment is therefore entered in favor of QBE INSURANCE COMPANY

21

and against STARWOOD MANAGEMENT, LLC, dba STARWOOD MANAGEMENT, INC.,

22

as follows:

23

///

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

///
3

Case 2:12-cv-01800-MMD-VCF Document 22 Filed 03/19/13 Page 4 of 4

1

a.

2
3

The QBE Policy No. QAV0000661is rescinded effective September 14,
2012;

b.

There is no insurance coverage under the QBE Policy QAV0000661 for

4

Starwood Management, LLC, dba Starwood Management, Inc., and QBE

5

is not obligated to seek recovery of the seized aircraft, nor indemnify

6

Starwood Management, LLC dba Starwood Management, Inc., for the

7

seized aircraft nor bring any legal action on behalf of Starwood

8

Management, LLC dba Starwood Management, Inc., “nor defend Starwood”

9

in any legal proceeding.

10
11

c.

There shall be no allowance of costs or attorney’s fees to either party.
20th

DATED this ____ day of March, 2013.

12
13

___________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4