Experience
Allegations of Breach of Insurance Contract and Bad Faith
We represented an insurance company in a suit for breach of insurance contract and bad faith arising out of the client’s decision not to pay benefits under an automobile accident insurance policy. The case was removed to federal court and eventually settled at mediation.
Anonymous Department of Insurance v. Big Six Auditing Firm
We represented an insurance liquidator who alleged that the auditor defendant was negligent in auditing the financial statements for the insolvent insurance company and that the negligence caused damage to the company's estate. This case involved complex concepts of insurance, accounting, and auditing. The discovery process included the depositions of over 25 witnesses, including 5 expert witnesses. On the first day of trial, the defendant settled for a multi-million dollar sum. During the case, Dinsmore & Shohl prevailed on nearly every motion. Significantly, the trial court allowed Dinsmore's litigation team to pursue damages against the defendant based upon a deepening of the insolvency theory.
Anonymous Plaintiff v. Insurance Company
Plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit against our client, an insurance company, seeking coverage in excess of $75,000 for moisture intrusion damage due to defects in Plaintiff's home. The case was removed to Federal court, was never certified as a class action and was eventually dismissed.
Anonymous Plaintiffs / Claimants v. Insurance Company
Serving as national counsel, we provide coverage opinions and advise carrier as to appropriate and consistent claims handling for multiple property claims, including hurricane, wind, fire, vandalism, water damage, hail, and similar perils. Where applicable, we manage local counsel and help shape strategy for discovery, briefing, trial, and settlement. We have defended depositions, defended subpoenas, and mediated claims on the client's behalf. We also directly defend such claims regionally. We have performed similar functions as national coordinating counsel for mold, Y2K, and liability/casualty claims.
Anonymous Plaintiff v. Insurance Company
Plaintiff filed suit for defense and indemnification under homeowners and personal umbrella policies. The carrier denied coverage because the policyholder engaged in excluded business pursuits and intentional acts. After extensive discovery over contested facts, the carrier obtained summary judgment in a lengthy court opinion on all multiple and independent grounds briefed.
Consumer / Commercial Litigation
Successful defense of financial institutions, loan servicers and finance companies in multiple claims and cases involving borrower allegations of predatory lending and violation of state and federal consumer protection statutes. Our representation also included the resolution of force-placed insurance claims and title defects.
Employee Policyholder v. Insurance Agent
I successfully represented an insurance agent who had been sued for misrepresentation in selling an employee benefit plan to a small business. The plan included disability and life insurance benefits. When an employee sought substantial benefits beyond those set forth in the policy, I filed and argued a motion to dismiss, invoking contract law and the ERISA statute, which required benefits to be described in writing, preempting common law misrepresentation claims. I thus obtained a dismissal of claims from state court due to exclusive federal jurisdiction over the alleged claims for benefits beyond those set forth in the written ERISA plan.
Insurance Coverage Opinion
I provided coverage opinions to a large insurance company on complex issues arising out of an alleged scheme by alcohol manufacturers to market and sell to underage consumers. The underlying plaintiffs sought to pursue a class action on behalf of the underage consumers and their parents, alleging intentional actions and certain negligent actions by the alcohol manufacturers. The manufacturers, in turn, sought insurance coverage. The coverage opinion addressed a number of issues, including the alleged marketing plans of these consumer products manufacturers and whether these could form the basis for a duty to defend or duty to indemnify under the insurance policies.
Steadfast Insurance Company v. Eon Lab (KY)
Dinsmore & Shohl represented the Plaintiff, a British based plc, in insurance coverage litigation relating to the MDL Phen-Fen litigation. The case was settled.
- Page 2 of 2