Lloyd's Slapped With Slavery Suit
By Michael Ha
NU Online News Service, March 30, 4:24 p.m. EST?Lloyd's of London, along with two other U.S. corporations, was slapped with a $2 billion lawsuit for profiting from the slave trade.[@@]
The suit, filed by six adults and two children who are descendants of African-American slaves, in Manhattan Federal Court in New York, seeks $2 billion in punitive damages and unspecified actual damages from Lloyd's, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Holdings and FleetBoston Financial Corporation.
The suit, filed Monday, alleges that Lloyd's benefited from the slave trade by insuring slave ships, while FleetBoston had financed the ships and R.J. Reynolds had profited from plantations using slave labor.
The complaint notes that over 8 million "Africans and their descendants were enslaved in the United States from 1619 to 1865," and that the practice of slavery constituted an "immoral and inhumane deprivation of Africans' life, liberty, African citizenship rights, cultural heritage." It further deprived the slaves of the fruits of their own labor.
The plaintiffs' lead attorney, Edward Fagan, is well known for representing various victim groups in reparation cases. In 1998, he succeeded in forcing Swiss-based banks into a ?685 million ($1.25 billion) settlement on behalf of victims of the Holocaust.
Mr. Fagan, whose office is located in Livingston, N.J., was not immediately available for comment.
In a response to the accusation, Lloyd's spokesperson Caroline Howe told National Underwriter, "We completely reject the allegations being made."
Ms. Howe noted that Lloyd's has not been served with any papers yet, "but from what's been said it seems that this complaint is based on the same factual allegations as the case that was recently rejected in Chicago."
The case referenced by Lloyd's involved a similar lawsuit filed on behalf of descendants of slaves, against corporations including Aetna Insurance and Lehman Brothers brokerage firm and R.J. Reynolds. That lawsuit, which was first filed in U.S. District Court in New York in 2002 and later moved to Chicago, was dismissed by a federal judge this past January.
In that ruling, U.S. District Judge Charles Norgle observed that plaintiffs' claims are "beyond the constitutional authority of this court" and that the suit failed to establish any specific, tangible connection between the plaintiffs and the companies named as defendants. However, Judge Norgle dismissed the case "without prejudice," which would allow future potential plaintiffs seeking reparations from U.S. companies to file an amended complaint.
Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader
Your access to unlimited PropertyCasualty360 content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:
- Breaking insurance news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
- Weekly Insurance Speak podcast featuring exclusive interviews with industry leaders
- Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
- Critical converage of the employee benefits and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, BenefitsPRO and ThinkAdvisor
Already have an account? Sign In Now
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.