Subrogee


Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Legal, Encyclopedia.
Related to Subrogee: Subrogor

Subrogee

A party to which a claim or legal right of another party is transferred. This is often associated with the transfer of the right to be repaid for a debt from one person to another. That is, a creditor can give or sell his/her right to a debt to some third party. In this case, the third party is the subrogee. See also: Forfaiting, Subrogor.
Mentioned in ?
References in periodicals archive ?
However, as we saw in the previous section, when a subrogee has an equitable interest in the legal claim, it may often make sense for them to secure control over the conduct of litigation enforcing that claim through a contract.
A statutory subrogee may pursue legal proceedings against a third party, alone or in conjunction with a claimant.
Acuity, as subrogee of Alice, George, and Mark filed a two-count complaint in the circuit court of Cook County, alleging negligence against Mario and negligent entrustment against Elia.
Thus, insureds generally have not been successful in bringing direct actions against reinsurers) Claims by state guaranty funds, as the subrogee of original insureds, also have failed.
Country Financial, as subrogee of Patrick Stevens vs.
An insurance company, therefore, might seek a voluntary assignment of rights from an insured individual if the insurer believes its position in court as an assignee will be stronger than as a subrogee.
If the responsible parties can be put on notice before the destruction of the fire scene, the subrogee will not be put in the position of defending whether destruction of the fire scene was within its control or contained relevant evidence.
Farmers Insurance Exchange as subrogee of Robert Rocklin vs.
In this case, by State Farm denying its policyholder's claim, State Farm ruled out any position as a subrogee (unless it eventually paid the claim by either settling or by losing a DJ action).
After a bench trial, the federal district court, applying Virginia law, entered judgment for Federal, finding that the insurer, as subrogee, had standing to sue the defendant for conversion and unjust enrichment.
The court reasoned that the principle of subrogation is limited where the insurer seeks a claim in subrogation against its own insured; the anti-subrogation rule -- that an insurer cannot be a subrogee against its insured on the very claim for which the insured was covered -- seeks to avoid conflicts of interest that would undercut the insurer's incentive to vigorously defend its insured's claims.