Extract to table

If, as Pinnacle Atlantic argues, "losses incurred" must be traced back to the accident year of origin, then the reallocation may have merit

Given the likelihood that this matter will proceed to either arbitration or trial, the selected expert must be comfortable and effective as a witness

Aggregate excess-of-loss treaties have distinct characteristics that differentiate them from per-occurrence and per-risk excess treaties, and the expert must be able to speak to the specific customs and practices applicable to the aggregate structure

If QC&S elects to assert a counterclaim for Pinnacle Atlantic's breach of the Treaty — a strategy that the engagement team will evaluate separately — the damages expert will quantify the full spectrum of counterclaim damages, including: • The unpaid reinsurance recoverables themselves ($78,400,000); • Pre-judgment interest at the contractual or statutory rate; • Consequential damages, including the cost of replacement reinsurance coverage (which we anticipate would need to be placed at substantially higher rates than the Treaty's provisional rate given current market conditions); • Credit facility covenant headroom reduction and any associated financing costs; • Potential credit-for-reinsurance implications under New York Insurance Law if the disputed recoverable must be written off or reserved against for Schedule F purposes; and • Any additional direct or consequential damages attributable to Pinnacle Atlantic's breach

Given the number of financial variables at play — multiple treaty years, alternative allocation scenarios, sliding-scale premium adjustments, interest calculations, and statutory surplus impacts — the expert must be capable of distilling complexity into clear, persuasive demonstrative exhibits and testimony

All three experts must be coordinated to ensure that their respective opinions are consistent with one another and with the underlying factual record