- Obtained summary judgment in an insurance coverage dispute in federal court in the Middle District of Georgia in a case regarding a medical professional liability insurance policy. The policy at issue was a physicians’ policy, specifying that a number of physicians employed by the hospital were the Named Insureds. The hospital was added to the policy as an Additional Insured, but only to the extent that the hospital was legally responsible for professional services (i.e., medical treatment) provided by one of the physicians insured under the policy. The hospital sought coverage for a negligent credentialing claim. The Court ruled, as a matter of law, that there was no coverage for the hospital under the policy because the credentialing activities of the hospital did not fit within the coverage provided under the Additional Insured endorsement. The case also involved the issue of whether the “single limit” provision of the policy barred the hospital’s claim and whether the insured gave late notice of the claim. Hudson Specialty Ins. Co. v. Columbus Reg'l Healthcare Sys., Inc., 4:11-CV-153 CDL, 2012 WL 6693741 (M.D. Ga. Dec. 21, 2012).
- Obtained summary judgment in an insurance coverage dispute in federal court the Northern District of Georgia in a bankruptcy adversary proceeding. The suit was brought by the trustee of a bankrupt investment management company that turned out to be a massive Ponzi scheme. Hundreds of investors made proof of claim filings in the bankruptcy court, seeking return of their investments. The trustee sought coverage under an investment management insurance policy. The District Court (adopting findings of fact and conclusions of law issued by the Bankruptcy Court) ruled that the policy was subject to rescission because the company concealed that fact that it was a Ponzi scheme. The Court made this ruling even though there was a fact issue as to whether the company representative who secured the policy was aware of the illegal activities at the time he applied for a renewal of the policy. The Court reiterated the well-settled principle that under Georgia law, the insurer need not prove that the misstatement or omission was made with intent to deceive or even knowledge of its falsity. If the statement is objectively false, the subjective belief of the insured is irrelevant. Perkins v. Am. Int'l Specialty Lines Ins. Co., 1:12-CV-3001-TWT, 2012 WL 6197087 (N.D. Ga. Dec. 11, 2012).
- Obtained partial summary judgment in favor of a group of insurers in a payment dispute with its insured regarding a loss-sensitive workers compensation and general liability insurance program from 1990. Successfully argued to the trial court that the insured’s claim for negligent supervision of the administration of claims was barred by the two-year statute of limitations. Williams Serv. Group, LLC v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, 1:09-CV-832-TWT, 2011 WL 2489952 (N.D. Ga. June 20, 2011), aff'd in part, vacated in part, 11-14999, 2012 WL 5233558 (11th Cir. Oct. 23, 2012). Following the trial court ruling, successfully obtained reversal at the Eleventh Circuit the trial court’s rulings with respect to the insurers’ ability to draw on collateral for certain time-barred amounts due under the program. Williams Serv. Group, LLC v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, 11-14999, 2012 WL 5233558 (11th Cir. Oct. 23, 2012).
- Obtained summary judgment on behalf of an insurance client based on the insured’s failure to provide timely notice of the claim. DS Waters of America v. Twin City Fire Insurance Co., 2011 WL 1743716, No. 1’09-CV-1819-TWT (N.D. Ga May 5, 2011).
- Defended a national bank accused of mortgage fraud, obtaining summary judgment on all counts.
- Obtained a settlement for a major insurance company on a coverage dispute involving a multi-million dollar real estate Ponzi scheme.
- Obtained a settlement for a medical start-up company accused of making fraudulent transfers.