XML 27 R16.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.7.0.1
LITIGATION
3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2017
Litigation Settlement [Abstract]  
Litigation
LITIGATION
There have been no new material legal proceedings and no material developments in the specific litigations or regulatory matters previously reported in the Company’s Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2016, except as set forth below:
Insurance Litigation
In November 2014, a lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Camden County entitled Arlene Shuster, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company. This lawsuit is a putative class action on behalf of all AXA Equitable variable life insurance policyholders who allocated funds from their policy accounts to investments in AXA Equitable’s separate accounts, which were subsequently subjected to volatility-management strategy, and who suffered injury as a result thereof. The action asserts that AXA Equitable breached its variable life insurance contracts by implementing the volatility management strategy. In February 2016, the Court dismissed the complaint. In March 2016, the Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal. In August 2015, another lawsuit was filed in Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial Division of New Haven entitled Richard T. O’Donnell, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company. This lawsuit is a putative class action on behalf of all persons who purchased variable annuities from AXA Equitable which were subsequently subject to the volatility management strategy and who suffered injury as a result thereof. Plaintiff asserts a claim for breach of contract alleging that AXA Equitable implemented the volatility management strategy in violation of applicable law. In November 2015, the Connecticut Federal District Court transferred this action to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. In March 2017, the Southern District of New York granted AXA Equitable’s motion to dismiss the complaint. In April 2017, the Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal.
In February 2016, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York entitled Brach Family Foundation, Inc. v. AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company. This lawsuit is a putative class action brought on behalf of all owners of UL policies subject to AXA Equitable’s cost of insurance (“COI”) increase. In early 2016, AXA Equitable raised COI rates for certain UL policies issued between 2004 and 2007, which had both issue ages 70 and above and a current face value amount of $1 million and above. The current complaint alleges a claim for breach of contract and a claim that the AXA Equitable made misrepresentations in violation of Section 4226 of the New York Insurance Law (“Section 4226”). Plaintiff seeks (a) with respect to its breach of contract claim, compensatory damages, costs, and, pre- and post-judgment interest, and (b) with respect to its claim concerning Section 4226, a penalty in the amount of premiums paid by the Plaintiff and the putative class. AXA Equitable’s response to the complaint was filed in February 2017. Additionally, a separate putative class action and six individual actions challenging the COI increase have been filed against AXA Equitable.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Although the outcome of litigation and regulatory matters generally cannot be predicted with certainty, management intends to vigorously defend against the allegations made by the plaintiffs in the actions described above and believes that the ultimate resolution of the matters described therein involving AXA Equitable and/or its subsidiaries should not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position of AXA Equitable. Management cannot make an estimate of loss, if any, or predict whether or not any of the matters described above will have a material adverse effect on AXA Equitable’s consolidated results of operations in any particular period.
In addition to the matters described above, a number of lawsuits, claims, assessments and regulatory inquiries have been filed or commenced against life and health insurers and asset managers in the jurisdictions in which AXA Equitable and its respective subsidiaries do business. These actions and proceedings involve, among other things, insurers’ sales practices, alleged agent misconduct, alleged failure to properly supervise agents, contract administration, product design, features and accompanying disclosure, cost of insurance increases, the use of captive reinsurers, payments of death benefits and the reporting and escheatment of unclaimed property, alleged breach of fiduciary duties, alleged mismanagement of client funds and other matters. In addition, a number of lawsuits, claims, assessments and regulatory inquiries have been filed or commenced against businesses in the jurisdictions in which AXA Equitable and its subsidiaries do business, including actions and proceedings related to alleged discrimination, alleged breaches of fiduciary duties in connection with qualified pension plans and other general business-related matters.  Some of the matters have resulted in the award of substantial fines and judgments, including material amounts of punitive damages, or in substantial settlements. Courts, juries and regulators often have substantial discretion in awarding damage awards and fines, including punitive damages. AXA Equitable and its subsidiaries from time to time are involved in such actions and proceedings. While the ultimate outcome of such matters cannot be predicted with certainty, in the opinion of management no such matter is likely to have a material adverse effect on AXA Equitable’s consolidated financial position or results of operations. However, it should be noted that the frequency of large damage awards, including large punitive damage awards and regulatory fines that bear little or no relation to actual economic damages incurred, continues to create the potential for an unpredictable judgment in any given matter.