Insurance Coverage
We have a national reputation as a preeminent firm in this area. Over the past two decades, we have tried many of the largest cases in the industry. As a result, we have strong and long-standing relationships with several of the country’s largest insurance companies including Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company (since before 1980), CNA Financial (since 1974), and Old Republic Insurance Company (through Chicago Underwriting Group) (since 1990). We have handled these companies’ largest coverage disputes in the climate change, D&O, E&O, asbestos, chemical exposure and environmental areas. These cases often have hundreds of millions of dollars at stake.
The cases we handle for these companies often lead to multi-week (and sometimes multi-phased) trials all over the country. Below is a listing of a few cases we have handled in the insurance coverage arena.
- In the Keasbey matter, following a four-month bench trial in New York City, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, entered judgment in CNA's favor that it had no "non-products" liability for asbestos claims. Opponents and the trade press called this a landmark decision in asbestos litigation. We are currently representing clients in five other high-stakes matters involving similar issues.
- In 2010, we represented Fireman’s Fund in a contribution action against another insurer under Oregon's statutory scheme for environmental claims. After a successful 9th Circuit appeal on an interim issue and a bench trial in Portland Oregon, the Court ruled that the opponents' missing policies covered all sites in question and awarded all damages, plus interest.
- In a bench trial lasting more than 3 months, our opponent asserted that Fireman's Fund had issued policies covering asbestos liability for a ten-year period, allegedly without limits. In late 2008, the San Francisco Superior Court issued a 120-page decision, finding that the allegedly missing policies had not been proven and that the opponents' claims were barred by laches in any event.
- We won an appeal to the Indiana Supreme Court on behalf of CNA in coverage litigation brought by U.S. Filter Corporation and Wheelabrator Technologies, Inc. in which they sought coverage under policies issued to previous owners of businesses whose activities gave rise to third-party silica claims. Following summary judgment and appeal, the Indiana Supreme Court ordered judgment in favor of insurers on a novel but increasingly important issue, holding that the plaintiffs, who were strangers to the policies in issue, did not succeed to any rights to coverage via the series of asset sales and transfers by which they acquired the businesses. The decision was a significant victory for the insurance industry, and established important precedent in the area of insurance coverage law that protects insurers’ rights to choose their insureds and protects insurers against multiplication of risk due to corporate transactions that occur after they issue policies.
- We represented Fireman’s Fund in coverage litigation brought by Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation arising out of underlying asbestos litigation. This case involved two trials. We won the first, a three-week bench trial involving policy interpretation issues. Eight weeks into the second, a jury trial on bad faith and disputed coverage issues, we were able to obtain a very favorable settlement for Fireman’s Fund.
- We successfully defended Fireman’s Fund in a major environmental insurance coverage lawsuit brought by the Dow Chemical Company involving the responsibility for clean-up and remediation costs at dozens of environmental waste sites at which Dow Chemical was a potentially responsible party. After a two-month jury trial, the case was settled on the eve of closing arguments on terms very favorable to Fireman’s Fund and for a fraction of the costs claimed by Dow at trial.
- Following a nine-month bench trial in a multi-phased proceeding, we won a defense judgment on behalf of two Fireman’s Fund subsidiaries in a coverage case brought by the Celotex Corporation. Celotex had alleged that the Fireman’s Fund entities were responsible for defense and indemnity coverage exceeding $100 million for asbestos claims filed against Celotex. The Bankruptcy Court — in one of the largest and most contentious asbestos Chapter 11 cases in U.S. history — rejected Celotex’s claims in their entirety. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment.
- We represented Fireman’s Fund in a suit by Dow Chemical against its insurers over coverage for damages caused by a Dow product called Sarabond (claimed damages exceeded $500 million). Dow had been sued by dozens of building owners after Sarabond, a mortar additive used to construct brick buildings, caused those buildings to crack and fail. After conducting discovery of the process by which Sarabond damaged buildings, the trial court conducted a three-day evidentiary hearing, considering facts related to several test buildings and testimony of construction experts from both sides, to determine how and when damage occurred. The trial court fashioned a formula for determining when damage occurred (and thus which policy, if any, would provide coverage). Applying this formula, only two of the buildings were found to have suffered damages during Fireman’s Fund’s coverage period, and Dow was ordered to repay Fireman’s Fund tens of millions of dollars Fireman’s Fund had spent defending these cases.
- We have represented Old Republic in numerous cases in which judgment was entered in its favor or in which we obtained favorable settlements prior to litigation. Examples include: (i) alleged misappropriation of trade secrets by directors and officers of a bio-tech firm; (ii) allegations of bad faith against Old Republic in California regarding its handling of a claim involving a legal malpractice case arising out of an underlying medical malpractice case; (iii) the application of “interrelated wrongful acts” language arising out of claims against an insured involving a complex investment mechanism designed by the insured; (iv) numerous securities class actions; (v) a legal malpractice claim pending in Los Angeles arising out of the insured’s alleged failure to obtain foreign patent protection for a client’s ground-engaging construction equipment; and (v) a legal malpractice claim pending in Los Angeles arising out of the insured’s representation of a client in an inverse condemnation case.
- The firm has ongoing representations in more than a dozen high-stakes coverage matters pending in state and federal courts throughout the United States.