Colony Insurance Company v. Oz Solutions
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:24-cv-01935
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Colony Insurance v. Oz Solutions, Judge Engelmayer granted Houston Casualty Company’s unopposed motion to intervene in Colony’s insurance lawsuit.
Houston Casualty Company was allowed to join Colony Insurance Company’s insurance action. The ruling also affects Colony Insurance Company, Oz Solutions, and Oren Ziv because HCC will participate in litigation concerning whether Colony’s policies can be rescinded.
What happened
Colony Insurance Company sued Oz Solutions and Oren Ziv seeking to cancel two insurance policies, alleging that defendants made fraudulent misrepresentations in their applications. Houston Casualty Company (HCC) sought to join the case because it said it was an additional insured under one of those policies.
The court found that HCC filed its motion promptly, had a significant legal and financial interest in the policy, and could be harmed if the policy were canceled. The court also found that the existing defendants might not adequately protect HCC’s interests, particularly because Oz Solutions had been out of business since approximately March 2018.
Judge Engelmayer granted HCC’s unopposed motion to intervene under the federal rule governing intervention. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion from the court’s docket.
The detailed version
- Colony Insurance Company v. Oz Solutions · No. 1:24-cv-01935
- Paul Engelmayer
- Aug. 14, 2025
Background
Colony Insurance Company brought this insurance action against Oz Solutions and Oren Ziv. Colony seeks a court declaration canceling two insurance policies it issued to Oz Solutions, alleging that the policies were obtained through fraudulent misrepresentations in defendants’ insurance applications. The parties had begun preliminary discovery in preparation for possible summary-judgment motions, and fact discovery was scheduled to end on October 17, 2025.
Houston Casualty Company (HCC) filed an unopposed motion to intervene as of right. Intervention allows a nonparty to join an existing lawsuit when the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a)(2) are met. HCC argued that it qualified as an additional insured under the Colony policy and that canceling that policy could affect HCC’s coverage rights and financial obligations in an underlying state-court action.
Court’s Analysis
The court held that HCC satisfied all four requirements for intervention as of right:
- Timeliness: HCC filed its motion less than two months after receiving notice of the action, before fact discovery closed. Neither party argued that HCC’s participation would cause prejudice.
- Protectable interest: HCC had a direct, substantial, and legally protected interest in the insurance coverage because the policy identified coverage for additional insureds and HCC was undisputedly an additional insured.
- Potential impairment: If the court rescinded the Colony policy, HCC’s coverage could be directly affected. HCC stated that rescission could prevent it from seeking coverage for insureds and could require it to bear defense and indemnity costs in the underlying state-court action.
- Inadequate representation: HCC showed at least a reasonable basis to believe that the existing defendants might not protect its interests. HCC stated that Oz Solutions had been out of business since approximately March 2018 and might have little to lose from an adverse judgment. Oz Solutions did not dispute that assertion.
Disposition
The court granted HCC’s unopposed motion to intervene in the lawsuit. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion pending at Docket 132. The opinion addressed HCC’s participation in the case; it did not decide whether Colony was entitled to rescind the insurance policies.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.