Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2021
Commitments and Contingencies [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	19. Commitments and Contingencies On May 5, 2020, a lawsuit styled Schulze v. Hallmark Financial Services, Inc., et al. (Case No. 3:20-cv-01130) was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division (the “Schulze Matter”). The Company, its former Chief Executive Officer and its former Chief Financial Officer are named defendants in the lawsuit brought on behalf of a putative class of shareholders who acquired Hallmark securities between March 5, 2019 and March 17, 2020. In general, the complaint alleges that the defendants violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by failing to disclose that (a) the Company lacked effective internal controls over financial reporting related to its reserves for unpaid losses, (b) the Company improperly accounted for reserves for unpaid losses, (c) the Company would be forced to report $63.8 million of prior year net adverse loss development, (d) the Company would exit the contract binding line of its commercial automobile primary insurance business, and by making positive statements about the Company’s business, operations and prospects that were allegedly materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. On July 21, 2020, the court appointed Rajeev Yalamanchili as Lead Plaintiff. Lead Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint on September 30, 2020. On July 28, 2021, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the lawsuit without prejudice to the plaintiff filing a second amended complaint within 28 days, and denied plaintiff’s request to submit supplemental evidence in support of his opposition to the motion to dismiss. Lead Plaintiff chose not to file a second amended complaint. On September 24, 2021, Lead Plaintiff and Defendants filed a Joint Stipulation seeking dismissal of the case with prejudice, with each side bearing its own attorneys’ fees and costs. No consideration has been given, offered, or promised to Lead Plaintiff or his counsel in connection with this dismissal. The Court terminated the case pursuant to the Joint Stipulation. As of September 30, 2021, we were engaged in various other legal proceedings in the ordinary course of business, none of which, either individually or in the aggregate, are believed likely to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position or results of operations, in the opinion of management. The various other legal proceedings to which we were a party are routine in nature and incidental to our business. From time to time, assessments are levied on us by the guaranty association of the states where we offer our insurance products. Such assessments are made primarily to cover the losses of policyholders of insolvent or rehabilitated insurers. Since these assessments can generally be recovered through a reduction in future premium taxes paid, we capitalize the assessments that can be recovered as they are paid and amortize the capitalized balance against our premium tax expense. We did not pay an assessment during the first nine months of 2021 or 2020.

Commitments and Contingencies

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2021

Commitments and Contingencies [Abstract]

19. Commitments and Contingencies

On May 5, 2020, a lawsuit styled Schulze v. Hallmark Financial Services, Inc., et al. (Case No. 3:20-cv-01130) was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division (the “Schulze Matter”). The Company, its former Chief Executive Officer and its former Chief Financial Officer are named defendants in the lawsuit brought on behalf of a putative class of shareholders who acquired Hallmark securities between March 5, 2019 and March 17, 2020. In general, the complaint alleges that the defendants violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by failing to disclose that (a) the Company lacked effective internal controls over financial reporting related to its reserves for unpaid losses, (b) the Company improperly accounted for reserves for unpaid losses, (c) the Company would be forced to report $63.8 million of prior year net adverse loss development, (d) the Company would exit the contract binding line of its commercial automobile primary insurance business, and by making positive statements about the Company’s business, operations and prospects that were allegedly materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. On July 21, 2020, the court appointed Rajeev Yalamanchili as Lead Plaintiff. Lead Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint on September 30, 2020. On July 28, 2021, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the lawsuit without prejudice to the plaintiff filing a second amended complaint within 28 days, and denied plaintiff’s request to submit supplemental evidence in

support of his opposition to the motion to dismiss. Lead Plaintiff chose not to file a second amended complaint. On September 24, 2021, Lead Plaintiff and Defendants filed a Joint Stipulation seeking dismissal of the case with prejudice, with each side bearing its own attorneys’ fees and costs. No consideration has been given, offered, or promised to Lead Plaintiff or his counsel in connection with this dismissal. The Court terminated the case pursuant to the Joint Stipulation.

As of September 30, 2021, we were engaged in various other legal proceedings in the ordinary course of business, none of which, either individually or in the aggregate, are believed likely to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position or results of operations, in the opinion of management. The various other legal proceedings to which we were a party are routine in nature and incidental to our business.

From time to time, assessments are levied on us by the guaranty association of the states where we offer our insurance products. Such assessments are made primarily to cover the losses of policyholders of insolvent or rehabilitated insurers. Since these assessments can generally be recovered through a reduction in future premium taxes paid, we capitalize the assessments that can be recovered as they are paid and amortize the capitalized balance against our premium tax expense. We did not pay an assessment during the first nine months of 2021 or 2020.