Travelers 2004 Annual Report Download - page 62

(xvi) State of New York Insurance Department; (xvii) State of North Carolina Department of Insurance; (xviii)
State of Ohio Office of the Attorney General; (xix) Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Office of the Attorney
General; (xx) State of Texas Department of Insurance; (xxi) State of West Virginia Office of Attorney General;
and (xxii) the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company is cooperating fully with these
subpoenas and requests for information. In addition, the Company is currently undertaking its own review of the
matters addressed by these subpoenas and requests for information. The Company is not able to predict the
outcome of the various agencies’ investigations or the reviews being undertaken, or how these matters may affect
the Company, if at all.
Four putative class action lawsuits have been brought against a number of insurance brokers and insurers,
including the Company, by plaintiffs who allegedly purchased insurance products through one or more of the
defendant brokers. The complaints are captioned Shell Vacations LLC v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.
(N.D. Ill. Jan. 14, 2005), Redwood Oil Company v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. (N.D. Ill. Jan. 21,
2005); Boros v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. (N.D. Cal. Feb. 4, 2005) and Mulcahey v. Arthur J.
Gallagher & Co. (D.N.J. February 23, 2005). Plaintiffs allege that various insurance brokers conspired with each
other and with various insurers, including the Company, to allocate brokerage customers and rig bids for
insurance products offered to those customers. The complaints include causes of action under the Sherman Act,
the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, federal and state common law and the laws of the
various states prohibiting antitrust violations and unfair and/or deceptive trade practices. Plaintiffs seek monetary
damages, including punitive damages and trebled damages, permanent injunctive relief, restitution, including
disgorgement of profits, interest and costs, including attorneys’ fees. The Company believes that these lawsuits
have no merit and intends to defend vigorously.
In addition to those described above, the Company is involved in numerous lawsuits, not involving asbestos
and environmental claims, arising mostly in the ordinary course of business operations either as a liability insurer
defending third-party claims brought against policyholders or as an insurer defending coverage claims brought
against it. While the ultimate resolution of these legal proceedings could be significant to the Company’s results
of operations in a future quarter, in the opinion of the Company’s management it would not be likely to have a
material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations for a calendar year or on the Company’s financial
condition or liquidity.
Item 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
NONE.
50