The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a brief per curiam opinion Tuesday affirming a district court decision in *Apex Hospitality Group, L.L.C. v. Independent Specialty Insurance Company*, a case involving attempts to enforce international arbitration requirements in a domestic insurance dispute.
The case centers on Independent Specialty Insurance Company's effort to compel Apex Hospitality Group to arbitrate a dispute concerning a surplus line insurance policy covering property in Louisiana. The insurer relied on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, commonly known as the New York Convention, as the basis for forcing arbitration.
The Fifth Circuit's ruling was heavily influenced by its recent decision in *Town of Vinton v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company* (5th Cir. 2025), which the court said involved "a materially identical policy in a factually similar case." In that decision, the appeals court affirmed the application of Louisiana law to the insurance dispute rather than international arbitration procedures.
The three-judge panel, consisting of Circuit Judges Haynes, Duncan, and Ramirez, noted the critical similarity between the two cases. "Like *Town of Vinton*, this case involves a lawsuit against a domestic insurer and does not include the foreign insurer, so that issue is not in play," the court wrote in its unsigned opinion.
Surplus line insurance represents a specialized segment of the insurance market, typically involving coverage for risks that standard insurers decline to cover. These policies often involve higher-risk properties or unique circumstances that require specialized underwriting expertise.
The Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards is an international treaty that facilitates the enforcement of arbitration agreements and awards across national boundaries. While powerful in international commercial disputes, its application to domestic insurance cases involving American companies and domestic insurers presents complex jurisdictional questions.
Independent Specialty Insurance Company's attempt to invoke the Convention appears to have been part of a strategy to move the dispute out of federal court and into arbitration proceedings. However, the Fifth Circuit's reliance on the *Town of Vinton* precedent suggests that when disputes involve domestic insurers and American companies, state law governs rather than international arbitration conventions.
The district court case originated in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana under case number 2:23-CV-2060. The appeals court's decision to issue a per curiam opinion indicates the panel viewed the case as straightforward given existing precedent, requiring no individual authorship or extensive legal analysis.
The brief nature of the Fifth Circuit's opinion reflects the court's view that *Town of Vinton* conclusively resolved the legal questions presented. When appellate courts encounter cases that closely mirror recent precedents, they often issue short affirmances rather than lengthy analytical opinions.
For the insurance industry, this decision reinforces the principle that domestic insurance disputes generally remain subject to state law and federal court jurisdiction, even when parties attempt to invoke international arbitration conventions. The ruling may discourage similar attempts by insurers to move domestic disputes into arbitration forums through international treaty provisions.
Apex Hospitality Group's victory in maintaining the case in federal court preserves its ability to pursue its claims under Louisiana insurance law and federal court procedures. The company can now proceed with its underlying insurance coverage dispute without being forced into arbitration proceedings.
The decision also highlights the importance of precedent in federal appellate practice. The Fifth Circuit's straightforward application of *Town of Vinton* demonstrates how recent circuit precedents can quickly resolve seemingly complex legal questions involving international treaties and domestic insurance law.
Legal practitioners handling surplus line insurance disputes should note that this decision, combined with *Town of Vinton*, establishes clear Fifth Circuit precedent limiting the application of international arbitration conventions to domestic insurance cases involving American parties and domestic insurers.
The case reflects broader tensions between international arbitration advocacy and traditional court-based dispute resolution in insurance matters. While arbitration can offer efficiency advantages, courts have shown reluctance to allow international conventions to override established domestic legal frameworks absent clear international elements.
With the appeal concluded, Apex Hospitality Group's case against Independent Specialty Insurance Company returns to the Eastern District of Louisiana for continued proceedings on the underlying insurance coverage dispute. The affirmance removes any possibility of forced arbitration under the international convention, allowing the case to proceed under standard federal court procedures and Louisiana insurance law.