ORDERS:
ORDER AND DECISION
This matter comes before me pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 38-73-10, et seq.,
(Supp. 1993) and S.C. Code Ann. §§ 1-23-310, et seq. (Rev. 1986 & Supp. 1993) upon a request
for a joint casualty lawyers' professional liability insurance rate increase. A hearing was
conducted February 22, 1995. The request was not contested by the Department of Insurance or
any member of the public. Upon review of the testimony and evidence submitted, the rate
increase request is approved.
FINDINGS OF FACT
By a preponderance of the evidence, I find:
(1) Petitioners submitted on November 21, 1994, to the South Carolina Department of Insurance
a formal filing for a request for a joint casualty lawyers' professional liability insurance rate
increase.
(2) The overall impact of the requested revision was a 100% increase in premium rates.
(3) The Department of Insurance conducted an independent investigation of the filing and
contested the initial filing. Accordingly, Petitioner amended its November 21, 1994, filing.
(4) Petitioners submitted on January 19, 1995, to the South Carolina Department of Insurance an
amendment to its initial formal filing for a request for a joint casualty lawyers' professional liability
premium rate increase.
(5) The overall impact of the amended requested revision is a 50% premium rate increase. (6)
By notice dated December 30, 1994, the public was advised that an application for a rate increase
by Petitioners had been made and that a hearing would be held on February 22, 1995.
(7) The amended filing details the indicated rate changes and proposed changes for increased
limits, deductible credits, base rate, and overall rates.
(8) The Department of Insurance, through its Chief Property and Casualty Actuary,
Mr. Martin Simons, testifying as an expert witness, represents that the amended rate increase
request will produce rates that are not excessive, inadequate, or unfairly discriminatory.
(9) The request was not contested by the State Consumer Advocate or any member of the
public.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, I conclude, as a matter of law, the following:
(1) The South Carolina Administrative Law Judge Division is empowered to hear this case
pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 38-73-910 (Supp. 1993) and Chapter 23 of Title I of the 1976
Code, as amended.
(2) Generally, a request for an insurance rate increase is governed by S.C. Code Ann.
§§ 38-73-10, et seq. (Supp. 1993).
(3) Pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 38-73-910 (Supp. 1993), notice of the filing and of the public
hearing was given in all newspapers of statewide circulation at least thirty (30) days in advance of
the hearing.
(4) Petitioner met the burden of proof in a rate increase request by establishing that the revised
rates would not be excessive, inadequate, or unfairly discriminatory. See, S.C. Code Ann. §
38-73-10(a)(1) (Supp. 1993).
ORDER
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the insurance rate increases requested by Petitioners are
approved. The effective date of the revisions are not to be effective prior to March 15, 1995.
_________________________________________
STEPHEN P. BATES
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
February ____, 1995
Columbia, South Carolina |
