Source: https://www.burldaniel.com/category/surplus-lines/
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 16:51:47+00:00

Document:
Engaged by defense counsel for Surplus Lines agency to address allegations of Insurance Agent E&O and Bad Faith including failure to procure proper insurance coverage. Case required analysis of the placement process to provide Property and Builders Risk insurance for an existing hotel plus renovations and additions. Dispute resulted from carrier’s partial denial of a windstorm claim while the hotel was still under construction. Attorneys Sarah Wariner and Scott Shanes, Clark Hill | Strasburger (469) 287-3900. Robertson v. Chubb, CRC, et al, Cause No. A160450C In The 51st Judicial District Court, Tom Green County, Texas.
Engaged by policyholder counsel to analyze and opine on Agents Errors & Omissions relative to the procurement of a Hole-In-One Special Events policy. The case required analysis of agent’s failure to inform policyholder regarding minimum yardage warranties in the binder. The dispute resulted after two Hole-In-Ones were not covered, requiring the policyholder to pay the prize indemnity award. Old White Charities v. Bankers Insurance; Civil Action No. 5:l7-cv-01375 in the United States District Court for the (Southern) District of West Virginia. Attorneys Lorie Masters and Michael Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth (202) 955-1500.
Engaged by insurance agent’s defense counsel to analyze allegations of Insurance Agent Errors and Omissions and Insurance Bad Faith. Case involved multiple Commercial Auto policies, Commercial General Liability, Professional Liability and required analysis of coverage grants for loading/unloading. Dispute followed carrier claim denial due to vehicle in question not being described as a ‘Covered Auto’. Attorneys Amanda Harvey and Kayleigh Watson, Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP (214) 698-8000. National Ambulance v. Hija Insurance Agency, et al. Cause No. 2016-52143 In 11th Judicial District Court, Harris County, Texas.
Engaged by policyholder counsel to analyze and opine on issues relative to Agents Errors & Omissions relative to Business Income coverage. Dispute resulted from Insurance agency’s failure to follow up with policyholder on carrier request for Business Income underwriting information at a new location. This failure resulted in partial denial of a Business Income claim when a building collapsed. Attorneys Mike Abrams and Kim Winter, Lathrop Gage, LLC (816) 460-5530. Axiom v. Marrs & Davolt, Case No. 16CY-CV00586 Division No. 5, In the Circuit Court of Clay County Missouri.
Engaged by defense counsel to analyze Agent Errors & Omissions issues relative to whether the agent was provided a copy of an oil field services Master Services Agreement. Plaintiff had failed to provide the agent with accurate information to obtain Jones Act / USL&H Maritime Workers Compensation and/or Other States coverage. The dispute resulted from the Commercial General Liability carrier denial of a contractual liability indemnity claim (under the customer’s MSA) for an employee injury which occurred over water. Zadok v. Bell Insurance, Cause No. 2016-44757 In 80th Judicial District Court, Harris County, Texas. Attorneys Ryan Brown and Nathan Shackelford, Hermes Law, PC (214) 749-6800.
Engaged by defense counsel to address allegations of Managing General Agent E&O / Bad Faith involving placement of surplus lines. Litigation resulted following claim denial for a vehicle accident involving a city bus being driven by a temporary staff employee. Case involved Non-owned Autos coverage under Commercial Auto and/or as an endorsement to Commercial General Liability policies. Attorneys Heather Duplantis and Kevin Welsh, Phelps Dunbar LLP (225) 346-0285. Johnson v. City of Alexandria, Number 247,208 In 9th Judicial District Court For The Parish Of Rapides, Division “G”, State of Louisiana.
Engaged by defense counsel to analyze allegations of Agent Errors & Omissions andInsurance Bad Faith involving placement of Surplus Lines Commercial General Liability. Case involved policy conditions that a general contractor be named as additional insured under subcontractors’ Commercial General Liability policies and maintain Certificates of Liability Insurance. General contractor was sued based on a subcontractors faulty work allegedly resulting in a fatality. Litigation ensued after carrier’s claim denial for failure to comply with policy terms and conditions. Attorney John Scott, Hardin, Kundla, McKeon & Poletto (973) 912-5222. Repoli v. LA Design and Construction, Lynoxx Group, et al / Coughlin v. Repoli, et al; Docket Nos. ESX-L-8325-14 and ESX-L-I011-15, Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division: Essex County.
Engaged by policyholder counsel to analyze primary and excess carriers’ claims handling practices relative to denial of a multi-million dollar claim for theft of bitumen being stored in China. Both Inland Marine and Ocean Marine coverage was afforded under a single Marine Open Cargo policy form. Engagement required analysis of manuscript Marine Insurance policy forms relative to Bulk Oil Clauses, bills of lading and bailee interests. Great American v. Castleton; Civil Action No. 15-cv-03976-JSR In United States District Court For The Southern District of New York. Attorneys John Shugrue and Caroline Upton, Reed Smith, LLP (312) 207-1000.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.