WILSON III v. STARR INSURANCE HOLDINGS, 2:25-cv-02685

Plaintiff William James Wilson III sued several insurance-related defendants, including C.V. Starr & Co., Starr Insurance Holdings, and Starr Surplus Lines Insurance Company, after denial of insurance coverage.
The dispute centers on liability coverage for alleged acts by "Pandora Marketing, LLC," a timeshare contract resolution business, following a lawsuit against Pandora and Wilson (the "Bluegreen Lawsuit").
Plaintiff claims he personally incurred losses and reputational harm after defendants allegedly failed to defend and indemnify in the Bluegreen Lawsuit.
Plaintiff filed complaints citing state insurance statutes and regulations, and included breach of contract claims.
Defendants moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim and to challenge jurisdiction; Plaintiff moved to remand one case to state court.
The court considered all motions and oral argument, ultimately dismissing all claims, some with prejudice and some without.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Subject matter jurisdiction/remand	Jurisdiction improper, should remand to state court	Diversity + amount in controversy support federal jurisdiction	Motion to remand denied; jurisdiction proper
Private right of action under state insurance statutes	Cites CA, NY, PA insurance laws as basis for claims	Statutes don't create private right of action	Claims under these statutes dismissed with prejudice
Contract claims against parent/affiliates (CV Starr/Starr Holdings)	Defendant entities involved via ownership/control	No privity; mere ownership not enough for liability	Dismissed with prejudice for lack of privity
Individual standing to sue on Pandora’s policy	Plaintiff suffered personal harm by paying Pandora’s legal fees	Harm is to Pandora, not plaintiff individually; plaintiff can’t assert LLC's rights pro se	Dismissed for lack of personal harm; leave to amend as to Starr Surplus only

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading standard for plausibility)
Zuber v. Boscov's, 871 F.3d 255 (motion to dismiss standard)
Fowler v. UPMC Shadyside, 578 F.3d 203 (pleading standard; construing facts in plaintiff’s favor)
Curay-Cramer v. Ursuline Acad. of Wilmington, Delaware, Inc., 450 F.3d 130 (no need to credit unreasonable factual inferences)
Kost v. Kozakiewicz, 1 F.3d 176 (pleading sufficiency)
Midlantic Nat'l Bank v. Hansen, 48 F.3d 693 (complete diversity requirement)
In re Burlington Coat Factory Sec. Litig., 114 F.3d 1410 (leave to amend exceptions)
Pizzini v. Am. Int'l Specialty Lines Ins. Co., 249 F. Supp. 2d 569 (bad faith contingent on breach of contract)