Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site eosp1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!harpo!eagle!mh3bs!mhtsa!exodus!gamma!ulysses!princeton!eosp1!robison
From: robison@eosp1.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Re: Insurance companies question
Message-ID: <537@eosp1.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 18-Jan-84 13:12:38 EST
Article-I.D.: eosp1.537
Posted: Wed Jan 18 13:12:38 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 19-Jan-84 05:38:38 EST
References: <488@hou5a.UUCP>
Organization: Exxon Office Systems, Princeton, NJ
Lines: 19

Insurance companies routinely insure themselves against insurance
claims.  The practice is called "re-insurance".
Obviously when a company re-insures, it is paying out some of its
profit to avoid a risk it cannot reasonably risk exposure to.
I believe that one of the big accidents that gave impetus to
re-insurance was a collision above NYC beyween two jet planes,
in the late 50's.  Insurance companies gave quite a bit of thought
to what the exposure of an accident like that might be, depending
upon where the planes came down.

A classic example of a casualty policy requiring re-insurance
that was once described to me:  Umbrella disaster insurance
for Rockefeller Center in NYC.  If one company owns a policy
like this, it has probably re-insured pieces of it with as many other
companies as possible.
				  - Toby Robison
			          decvax!ittvax!eosp1!robison
				  or:   allegra!eosp1!robison
				  (maybe: princeton!eosp1!robison)