F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 3
T HE N EWSMONTHLY
OF THE
A MERICAN A CADEMY
OF
The Role of the Actuary
W
HEN LITIGATION INVOLVES issues of impor-
tance to its membership, the Academy sometimes files “friend of the court,” or “amicus curiae,” briefs to address those issues. In filing these briefs, the Academy has the opportunity not only to educate courts about the important role actuaries play in providing professional services to insurance companies, pension plans, and others, but also to address potential misconceptions about the profession and its standards. The Academy has filed amicus curiae briefs on a wide range of issues, including the weight to be assigned to actuaries’ testimony in multi-employer pension plan arbitrations (Concrete Pipe and Products of California Inc. v. Construction Laborers Pension Trust for Southern California); the importance of permitting pension plan fiduciaries to rely on the expert conclusions of their actuaries (Shay v. Howard); the appropriate definition of fiduciary activity under ERISA (Lockheed Corp. v. Spink); and the importance of recognizing actuaries as professionals for the purposes of statutes of limitations and other state laws (Michigan Employees’ Retirement System of Michigan et al. v. Gabriel, Roederer, Smith & Co.). Most recently, the Academy submitted an amicus curiae brief to the Court of Appeals for the State of Arizona in Cohen v. J. Huell Briscoe & Associates Inc. The case
Inside Got a Bright Idea? New online service links academic researchers with practicing actuaries . . . . PAGE 2 Public Statements The Academy’s 2002 public statements at a glance . . . . . . . . PAGES 4-5 All Aboard ISO nominations for the Academy’s Board of Directors . . . . . . . . . . PAGE 7 Washington Forum It’s slated for May 9. Read about it now . . . . . PAGE 8
arises out of the insolvency of AMS Life Insurance Co. While the Academy explicitly takes no position on the facts of the case, the findings of the trial court raise several issues that could affect all Academy members who provide valuation services to life insurers in Arizona. It appears that the trial court may have held the actuarial firm, J. Huell Briscoe & Associates Inc. significantly reSee FRIEND OF THE COURT, Page 7
Calculating Coverage in Terror’s Wake
H
health coverage be affected if a suicidal terrorist detonated a bomb on a busy street near your office? What if that bomb spread radiation? How would the insurance marketplace react if biological agents were used to poison your city’s water and food supply? In its new monograph Group and Health Coverage in the Wake of September 11, the Academy’s Terrorism/Extreme Events Work Group considers the impact of such catastrophic terrorist events on group and health coverage, including coverage for medical benefits and nonmedical benefits such as group life, disability, and long-term care. The monograph tackles isOW WOULD YOUR
sues such as the availability of insurance and reinsurance, cost and underwriting issues, and solvency concerns. Since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, which had a substantial effect on the insurance industry, particularly in the property/casualty, workers’ compensation, and reinsurance areas, there has been a heightened awareness of the possibility of future terrorist attacks that could affect the health insurance marketplace. Any catastrophic terrorist attack would have a broad and varied effect on individuals, employers, health care providers, insurers, reinsurers, and the government. Depending on the type and the extent of the See TERROR, Page 7
Actuarial UPDATE
Academy Serves as Friend in Court
A CTUARIES