Lawyers Title Co. of Mo. v. ST. PAUL TITLE INS., 75-1475.
| Decision Date | 08 December 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 75-1475.,75-1475. |
| Citation | 526 F.2d 795 |
| Parties | LAWYERS TITLE COMPANY OF MISSOURI, a corporation, Appellant, v. ST. PAUL TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION, a corporation, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Chester A. Love, Clayton, Mo., for appellant.
Robert S. Allen, St. Louis, Mo., for appellee.
Before GIBSON, LAY and ROSS, Circuit Judges.
The Lawyers Title Company of Missouri brings this suit under the Sherman and Clayton Acts, 15 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 26, alleging that the defendant St. Paul Title Insurance Company has unfairly restrained competition through predatory pricing of title insurance in the metropolitan area of St. Louis. Plaintiff charges that the defendant is selling real property title insurance in the St. Louis area at prices lower than those the defendant charges in other areas of Missouri.
The defendant asserts that the McCarran-Ferguson Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1012, exempts it from federal antitrust regulation. The district court sustained the motion to dismiss the complaint because the practices challenged in the complaint were regulated by Missouri insurance laws and were therefore not subject to federal antitrust statutes. This appeal followed. We affirm.
The McCarran-Ferguson Act provides in part:
No Act of Congress shall be construed to invalidate, impair, or supersede any law enacted by any State for the purpose of regulating the business of insurance, . . . unless such Act specifically relates to the business of insurance; Provided, That . . . the Sherman Act and . . . the Clayton Act, and . . . the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended, shall be applicable to the business of insurance to the extent that such business is not regulated by State law.
15 U.S.C. § 1012(b) (emphasis added).
The fundamental issue is whether Missouri statutes "regulate" pricing practices in the title insurance industry within the meaning of the McCarran-Ferguson Act. We find, as did the district court, that Missouri law does so regulate the industry. Chapter 381 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri (1969) applies specifically to title insurance carriers. Section 381.100 of that chapter governs title insurance pricing and the first sentence of that section makes specific reference to price discrimination:
Title insurance risk rates shall be reasonable and adequate for the class of risks to which they apply, and shall not be unfairly discriminatory between risks involving essentially the same hazards. . . .
Mo.Rev.Stat. § 381.100 (1969).
This and other provisions of Missouri law are to be enforced by the State Superintendent of Insurance, who is empowered by Mo.Rev.Stat. § 381.120 (1969) to conduct periodic examinations of accounts, to require reports and to hold public hearings to determine whether title insurance carriers are complying with all statutory duties.
Defendant argues that although the Missouri statutes do provide a general standard governing title insurance prices, in practice the state does not actively supervise or control title insurance rates. It is further argued that Missouri's statutes are so different from the federal antitrust legislation that Missouri law will not be "invalidated, impaired, or superseded" by application of the Sherman and Clayton Acts.
The Sixth Circuit has held "If a state has generally authorized or permitted certain standards of conduct, it is regulating the business of insurance under the McCarran Act." Ohio AFL-CIO v. Insurance Rating Board, 451 F.2d 1178, 1181 (6th Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 917, 93 S.Ct. 215, 34 L.Ed.2d 180 (1972). We agree, and hold that if the state statute generally regulates the pricing schedules and conduct of the insurance companies, this suffices to exempt the insurance carriers so regulated from federal antitrust suits. See Fleming v. Travelers Indemnity Co., 324 F.Supp. 1404, 1406 (D.Mass. 1971).
The Missouri statutes present a comprehensive scheme for control of title insurance pricing. Plaintiff's basic complaint is that this state regulation has been ineffective. However, the McCarran Act exemption does not depend on the zeal and efficiency displayed by a state in enforcing its laws. Congress has provided that exemption whenever there exists a state statute or regulation...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Crocker Nat. Corp.
...state regulated the specific conduct alleged to be in violation of the federal antitrust laws. See Lawyers Title Co. of Mo. v. St. Paul Title Ins. Corp., 526 F.2d 795, 797 (8th Cir. 1975); Crawford v. American Title Ins. Co., 518 F.2d 217, 219 (5th Cir. 1975).86 The New York Insurance Law p......
-
Perry v. Fidelity Union Life Ins. Co.
...971, 981 n.22, Quoting Andrucci v. Gimbel Bros., Inc., W.D.Pa., 1973, 365 F.Supp. 1240, 1243. 27 E. g., Lawyers Title Co. v. St. Paul Title Ins. Corp., 8 Cir., 1975, 526 F.2d 795, 797; Ohio AFL-CIO v. Insurance Rating Bd., 6 Cir., 1971, 451 F.2d 1178, 1181, Cert. denied, 1972, 409 U.S. 917,......
-
Chicago Title Ins. Co. v. Huff
...recognized that title insurance is an aspect of the insurance industry which the states may regulate. Lawyers Title Co. of Mo. v. St. Paul Title Ins. Co., 526 F.2d 795 (8th Cir. 1975); McIlhenny v. American Title Ins. Co., 418 F.Supp. 364 In sum total, we are constrained to observe Chicago ......
-
Workers' Compensation Ins. Antitrust Litigation, In re
...of FTC v. National Casualty Co., 357 U.S. 560, 78 S.Ct. 1260, 2 L.Ed.2d 1540 (1958); this circuit's Lawyers Title Co. of Mo. v. St. Paul Title Ins. Corp., 526 F.2d 795 (8th Cir.1975); Dexter v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y of the United States, 527 F.2d 233 (2d Cir.1975) 9 and Ohio AFL-CI......
-
Ratemaking and Rate Related Practices
...Exch . , 181 F.2d 174 (8th Cir. 1950); Title Ins ., 702 F. Supp. 2d at 854. 333 . Lawyer’s Title Co. v. St. Paul Title Ins. Corp . , 526 F.2d 795 (8th Cir. 1975); Commander Leasing Co. v. Transamerica Title Ins. Co . , 477 F.2d 77 (10th Cir. 1973); Ohio AFL-CIO v. Ins. Rating Bd . , 451 F.2......
-
Table of cases
...N.E.2d 356 (Mass. App. Ct.), 50 LaPierre v. Md. Cas. Co., 443 N.E. 2d 1322 (1982), 50 Lawyer’s Title Co. v. St. Paul Title Ins. Corp . , 526 F.2d 795 (8th Cir. 1975), 66 Leegin Creative Leather Products v. PSKS, Inc.551 U.S. 877 (2007), 15, 108 Lerma v. Univision, 52 F. Supp. 2d 1011 (E.D. ......
-
Statutory Exemptions for Regulated Industries
...rates automatically go into effect if the regulator fails to challenge them. See, e.g., Lawyers Title Co. v. St. Paul Title Ins. Corp., 526 F.2d 795,797-98 (8th Cir. 1975); Commander Leasing Co. v. Transamerica Title Ins., 477 F.2d 77, 84 (10th Cir. 1973) (“Our present task is to determine ......
-
Table of Cases
...471 F.2d 76 (3d Cir. 1972), 179 Lawline v. ABA, 956 F.2d 1378 (7th Cir. 1992), 19 Lawyers Title Co. v. St. Paul Title Ins. Corp., 526 F.2d 795 (8th Cir. 1975), 287 Lease Lights, Inc. v. Public Serv. Co. of Okla., 849 F.2d 1330 (10th Cir. 1988), 116 Lender’s Serv. v. Dayton Bar Ass’n, 758 F.......