Engaged by wholesale intermediary’s defense counsel to assess placement issues for surplus lines Warehouseman’s Legal Liability insurance. Dispute arose following carrier’s denial of a fire loss to goods stored at a warehouseman’s location. Attorney Joe Campo, Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP, (213) 680-5072. Rotax v. G.J. Sullivan/Amwins, et al, Case No. 20STCV107687 In the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles.
Property Insurance Expert Witness
Property insurance seems simple at first glance – pay your premiums, report your fire-windstorm-theft-flood claim to the carrier, settle the claim, repair/replace the damaged property. In reality coverage structure and claims handling is one of the most complicated areas in all of Property and Casualty insurance.
Call (817) 980-4897 to discuss your case.
Coverage Structure
A plethora of policy forms and endorsements have been developed to insure diverse types and locations of buildings, contents, and Business Income exposures. Understanding the interaction between various coverage forms is required to implement suitable coverage structure. Property insurance exposures include:
- Buildings, Business Personal Property
- Business Income, Extra Expense
- Flood Insurance (NFIP + Excess Flood)
- Builders Risk, Inland Marine, Equipment Floaters (Construction projects, )
- Ocean Marine, Inland Marine (cargo in transit over land or sea, import / export, offshore drilling rigs).
- Ordinance and law (building owners).
- Selling price valuation (manufacturers finished stock).
- Property of Others - Bailee exposure (dry cleaners, repair shops).
- Boiler & Machinery / Equipment Breakdown (manufacturers, building owners, public utilities).
- Crime insurance / Fidelity bonds (employee theft)
Potential Coverage Deficiencies
While property losses are disruptive, inadequate coverage can extinguish a business altogether. Properly structured insurance may ease the recovery process. The list of potential coverage deficiencies might include:
- Insurance to value - inadequate limits may result in coinsurance penalties.
- Flood losses so catastrophic policyholders need years to rebuild – if they ever do.
- Locations not covered.
- Inadequate Business Income limits, or NO coverage at all.
- Preparing proof of loss forms to submit claim.
Claim Disputes
Claims handling disputes between policyholders and carriers arise from a number of sources:
- Special form (All Risk) vs. Specified perils
- Replacement cost vs Actual Cash Value
- Coinsurance penalties
- Vacancy clauses
- Blanket vs. Scheduled policies
- Deductibles
- Definition(s) of "Covered Property"
- Contractual or Lease requirements
- Hard to value property
Homeowners face similar dilemmas:
- Do I have enough insurance to rebuild my home? Replace my contents?
- How are my home computer, jewelry and antiques covered? How will they be valued?
- Where do we live after a fire? How would we pay rent?
- Is my home located in a flood zone?
Our Experience with Property Insurance
Mr. Daniel has dealt with property insurance issues since 1973. As an agent he placed property insurance for a diverse clientele across a variety of industries. As an Expert Witness he has been engaged on cases across the spectrum of Property Insurance. Over his career he has developed broad expertise with underwriting, placement and claims handling practices in regards to:
- Buildings / Business Personal Property.
- Business Income / Extra Expense.
- Builders Risk / Equipment Floater.
- Flood Insurance.
- Boiler & Machinery / Mechanical Breakdown.
- Inland Marine / Ocean Marine (including Stock Throughput Policies).
- Crime Insurance.
- Homeowners Policies (see ‘Personal Lines’).
Property Insurance Cases
Carrier defense counsel engagement to evaluate coverage issues for a dwelling total fire loss during Colorado wildfires. Case required analysis as to whether a surplus lines carrier had any duty relative to setting limits of insurance relative to replacement cost and/or rental receipts. Fischer v. National Indemnity Company, et al Case No. 2022CV30092 Division 1, District Court Grand County, Colorado.
Engaged by policyholder counsel to analyze Pollution Liability coverage and underwriting issues following denial of a bodily injury claim from a carbon monoxide leak. Engagement required analysis of claims-made renewal underwriting, first party cleanup vs. third party liability, and bad faith claims handling issues. Attorneys David Newman and Brittany Armour, Hogan Lovells US, LLP (267) 675-4600. OQ Chemicals v. Lloyds, Civil Action No. 4:23-cv-01125 In The United States District Court For The Southern District of Texas, Houston Division.
Engaged by carrier’s defense counsel to assess coverage and claims handling issues for a sprinkler system leak claim at a high value vacant dwelling and whether a surplus lines intermediary has any duty to advise a policyholder. The policyholder had declined water damage coverage during a surplus lines placement, resulting in carrier later denying the sprinkler claim. Attorneys Doug Fogle and Joel Wertman, Winget, Spadafora & Schwartzberg, LLP (215) 433-1500. Newtown Square v. Worldwide Facilities, et al, Civil Action No. 21-5397 In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
Engaged by defense counsel to evaluate carrier’s investigation and claims handling conduct for a loss under a Financial Institution Crime policy. The dispute resulted after a claim for loan losses was denied based on the loss not resulting from employee dishonesty. Attorney John Moore, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP (215) 988-2750. Appalachian Community Federal Credit Union v. CUMIS Insurance, Case No. 3:20-CV-0553 In United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee Northern Division.
Engaged by policyholder counsel to review Insurance Agent Errors and Omissions relative to standards of care for placing Homeowners Insurance policies. Agent placed coverage with a ‘Cosmetic Roof Exclusion’ whereas prior carrier’s policy had no such exclusion for metal roofs. Policyholder suffered significant financial damage after denial of a hailstorm claim. Attorney Matt Montgomery, Hossley Embry, LLP. Permenter v. Assured Partners, Civil Action No. 3:31-cv-1325 In United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas Dallas Division.
Engaged by defense counsel to respond to policyholder allegations of Bad Faith Claims Handling of a purported Homeowners hail claim. Dispute resulted after carrier’s adjusters could find no visible evidence of hail damage, including after reinspection. Case required analysis of public adjuster’s inflated Xactimate estimates and questionable findings of roof damage. Attorney Carin Marcussen, Lugenbuhl, Wheaton, Peck, Rankin & Hubbard (713) 766-7969. Hughes v. USAA, Cause No. 20-07-08642 In The 284th Judicial District Court of Montgomery County, Texas.
Engaged by policyholder counsel to review Insurance Agent Errors and Omissions issues relative to standards of care for placing NFIP flood policies on buildings in unmapped rural areas with no Flood Zone determination. Complicating factors included issues of flood-in-progress and interstate highway construction blocking the natural drainage outlet of a glacial depression prairie lake decades before the flood. Wilkens v. Dorris; Attorney Mitch Peterson, Davenport, Evans, Hurwitz & Smith, LLP (605) 357-1242
Engaged by policyholder counsel to serve as their Property Insurance and Equipment Breakdown / Boiler & Machinery Expert. Case required analysis of claims handling proof of loss issues after a low-pressure underground pipeline was damaged by an over-pressurization event. Case also involved Business Income and Insurance Bad Faith. Dispute resulted following carrier’s claim denial citing an “observable” damage requirement in lieu of technical pressure analysis as proof of loss. NiSource v. FM Global, Case No. 2:20-cv-00572-GCS-CMV in United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Eastern Division. Attorneys Brad Nes and Teri Josie-Diaz, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, (202) 739-3000.
Engaged by policyholder counsel to review issues of Homeowners Insurance Bad Faith claims handling for extensive mold damage to insured’s residence. Attorneys David Schack and Matt Segal, Barnes & Thornburg, LLP (310) 284-3873. Buccholz v. Crestbrook Insurance Company d/b/a Nationwide, Cause No. 1:20-CV-00449-AP In United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.
Engaged by counsel for numerous plaintiffs who suffered flood damage from the May 2020 Edenville dam failure in Midland County, MI. Case(s) required review of NFIP guidelines for Flood Zones mapping/remapping, and notification to property owners relative to potential Insurance Agent Errors & Omissions claims. Attorney Andrew Laurila, Rasor Law Firm, PLLC (248) 543-9000.
Retained by insurance agency counsel defending alleged Agent Errors and Omissions for failure to procure Business Income coverage for Covid-19 losses under a Commercial Auto (Mobile Operations) endorsement to a Businessowners policy. Case required response to a laundry list of alleged duties owed by the agent far outside the accepted standards of care for a reasonably prudent Texas insurance agent. Case assessment included the lack of physical damage, the standard virus exclusion found in most ISO property forms, and the likelihood of the insured’s failure to read the policy. Attorneys John Nevins and Robert Bragalone, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP, (214) 231-4660. Sanbuco v. Governor Insurance Agency, et al; Civil Action No. SA-20-CV-01045-XR In United States District Court, Western District of Texas San Antonio Division.
Retained by policyholder counsel seeking claim payment for October 2019 tornado losses in Garland, TX. Case required evaluation of Inland Marine, Commercial Property and Business Income clauses and coverage under a Stock Throughput Policy. Litigation ensued following claim denial based principally on nonexistent policy language relative to unscheduled locations and carrier delay/refusal to attempt good faith settlement. Attorneys Darrell Adkerson, Adkerson, Hauder & Bezney, P.C. (214) 740-2500 and Troy Morris, Perez Morris LLC (855) 580-7530. Transform v. Starr Indemnity & Liability Co., Cause No. DC-20-03860 In The 116th District Court, Dallas County, Texas.
Engaged by policyholder counsel alleging Agent Errors and Omissions as its basis to recover coinsurance penalties. Despite assuming duties to set replacement cost limits for a hotel, the insurance agency made material errors resulting in deficient property limits and the property being severely underinsured for a hailstorm claim. Engagement required analysis of agency’s flawed valuation methodology using tax rolls and appraised ‘market value’, coinsurance calculations, and issues involving Ordinance & Law and extended Business Income loss. Attorney Todd Hurd (817) 426-4529. Cornerstone, et al v. Rodda Yates, et al; Cases No. 2015-514,308 In The District Court Of Lubbock County, Texas, 99th Judicial District.
Retained by insurance company defense counsel to examine Homeowners Insurance underwriting and address Insurance Bad Faith allegations against the carrier. Policyholder significantly understated and misrepresented his dwelling square footage on the application resulting in policy limits well below replacement cost. Regardless that the carrier relied on misrepresentations he made on the application to issue the policy, plaintiff now alleges carrier was responsible for calculating replacement cost after a 2017 fire destroyed the structure. Attorney Bill Manning, Van De Poel, Levy, Thomas, Arneal, LLP (925) 034-6102. St. Martin v. IDS Property Casualty Insurance Company, Case No.: SCV-263296, Superior Court of the State of California, County of Sonoma.
Engaged by policyholder counsel to analyze Property and Business Income/Extra Expense coverage issues under Property, Docks & Piers and Excess Ocean Marine policies for two fire losses originating from a tenant’s dockside storage of wood pellets. Case included review of coinsurance issues, tenant’s status as a Dependent Property for Business Income loss plus carrier subrogation against tenant’s Commercial General Liability policy. Travelers (as subrogee of Port of Port Arthur) v. Texas Pellets, et al, Cause No. B-203,222 In 60th Judicial District Court, Jefferson County, Texas. Attorney Clint Brasher, Brasher Law Firm, PLLC. (409) 832-3737
Engaged by counsel for carrier as plaintiff seeking Declaratory Judgment confirming its coverage denial. Case involved analyzing underwriting data provided by a group of pharmaceutical entities. The application(s) failed to disclose the true nature of the non-pharmaceutical inventories it was seeking to insure. Hurricanes Irma and Maria hit the insured’s locations in Puerto Rico and Florida resulting in losses under the Property and Inland Marine coverage forms. Carrier denied the claims based on policyholder’s misrepresentations. Attorney Rob Reeb, Marwedel, Minichello & Reeb, P.C. (312) 445-5314. U.S. Specialty Insurance Company v. Atlantic Biologicals, Case No. 18-23276-Civ-Cooke/Goodman, United States District Court For The Southern District of Florida.
Engaged by policyholder counsel to evaluate carrier’s claims handling practices in adjusting a Property and Business Income claim for water damage at an apartments complex. Insurance Bad Faith allegations stemmed from long carrier delays/deficiencies in processing claim information and excessive requests for Business Income claim documentation. Attorneys Brian Enright and Anthony Leony, Halloran Sage (203) 672-5432. Hill v. Providence Mutual, Docket No. NNH-CV 16-6065871-S, Superior Court J.D. of New Haven at New Haven.
Engaged by policyholder counsel to analyze NFIP, non-NFIP and/or Excess Flood Insurance issues. Case required analysis of NFIP Flood Zones remapping and Flood Insurance Rate Map revisions for a Hurricane Harvey loss at an uninsured location. Agency was retained under terms and conditions of a fee-based insurance and risk management services contract. Attorney Will King, Feldman and Feldman, PC (713) 986-9471. The Harris Center v. Higginbotham, Case No. Case No. 201812120 In 80th District Court, Harris County, Texas.
Engaged by policyholder counsel to analyze issues of Insurance Bad Faith Claims Handling. Case required analysis of damage patterns from straight-line winds and whether construction defect caused the loss. Dispute followed carrier denying most of the damage from a windstorm claim asserting construction defect as the proximate cause of loss. Attorneys. Scott Blass and Erica Cross, Bordas and Bordas Attorneys, PLLC, (304) 242-8410. Thompson v. Allstate, Civil Action No. 5:18-CV-118, In The United States District Court For The Northern District of West Virginia, Wheeling.
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.
Retained by policyholder’s counsel to opine regarding material misrepresentations made by the wholesale agent/intermediary in placing a large apartments/condominiums enrollment policy. Misrepresentations included the structure of self-insured retentions, towers of policy layers with multiple carriers, stop-loss limits and failure to add/delete properties when requested. Case required analysis of issues including Agents Errors & Omissions, Insurance Bad Faith, Commercial Property and Business Income Insurance. Property Risk Services Management v. Jonathan Hilsher, Risk Placement Services, et al, Cause No. DC-18-04287 In The 193rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas. Attorney Tim Soefje, Seltzer Chadwick Soefje & Ladik, PLLC (469) 626-5180.
Engaged by policyholder counsel as their Property Insurance expert to evaluate Bad Faith Claims Handling for a hail damage claim. Independent adjuster’s flawed Xactimate estimate resulted in his seeking a comparative bid by introducing his own roofing contractor. That roofer then performed partial repairs and stole most of the insurance claim proceeds. MLLCA v. Argonaut, Vericlaim, et al; Cause No. CV 17-01-057 In The 271st Judicial District Of Wise County, Texas. Attorney Matt Meyer, Boyd Powers & Williamson (940) 627-8308.
Engaged by counsel defending insurance carrier against allegations of Bad Faith claims handling following denial of an uncovered Flood claim. Case required analysis of NFIP Flood Zone definitions relative to an Inland Marine policy flood exclusion. Attorneys Mike Cawley and Alex Brown, Gordon & Rees | Scully Mansukhani, LLP (215) 561-2300. Vanguard v. Atlantic Specialty Insurance Co. Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, January Term 2017, No. 02023.
Engaged by defense counsel to address allegations of Insurance Agent E&O / Bad Faith involving Business Income – Rents insurance. Dispute resulted following a restaurant fire loss and subsequent carrier denial of landlord’s claim for Rents coverage under tenant’s Property insurance policy. Case required analysis of insurance requirements in a building lease, numerous years of tenant and landlord carrier/coverage histories and associated Certificates of Insurance. Attorneys Bill Threlkeld and James Wilcoxen, Fenton, Fenton, Smith, Reneau & Moon, PC, (405) 235-4671. PWB v. Frates Insurance, Case No. CIV-17-387-R, In The United States District Court For The Western District of Oklahoma.
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 counsel defending insurance agent against Agent Errors & Omissions failure to procure allegations. Case involved carrier notice to the insured that the flood peril would be removed at renewal of its property policy. Agent received no response to NFIP flood quotes provided to the policyholder. Policyholder now asserts that it instructed agent to procure NFIP replacement policies for two locations which subsequently sustained uncovered flood losses. Attorney Anthony Green, Winget, Spadafora & Schwartzberg, LLP (212) 221-6900. Pinnacle Property v. Haylor Freyer & Coon, et al, Index No.: 2016EF2833, Supreme Court of The State of New York County of Onondaga.
Engaged by policyholder counsel as their designated Property and Business Income expert to opine regarding claims handling for two Business Interruptions resulting from one water loss. Case involved partial claim denial for a furniture store’s second temporary business closure. Attorney Michael Collins, Hill Farrer & Burrill LLP, (213) 620-0460. Leather Expo, Inc. v. California Capital Insurance Co., Case No. BC611176 Superior Court Of The State of California County of Los Angeles Central District.
Engaged by counsel defending insurance carrier against allegations of Bad Faith Claims Handling. Case involved a Motor Truck Cargo total fire loss of load being hauled, and subsequent claim denial by carrier. Two expert reports were required: carrier was initially Defendant (against policyholder allegations) and later Third Party Plaintiff (when it joined the insurance agency as a Third Party Defendant). Case required expertise with Inland Marine policy forms, Motor Truck Cargo coverage placement through a wholesale broker / Purchasing Group master policy and Agent Errors & Omissions regarding non-disclosure of terms & conditions to policyholder. Attorney John Kazen – Kazen, Meurer & Perez (956) 712-1600. Zebra Carriers v. Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association Insurance Company v. Solo Trucking Insurance Agency; Cause No. 2015-CVQ-003844-D2 In 111th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas.
Engaged by defense counsel as their Flood Insurance expert. Case required analysis of NFIP regulations and flood insurance requirements for a loan closing. Dispute resulted from a flood loss when retail agent/carrier had failed to procure a standard NFIP flood insurance policy, triggering lender obligations under its forced-place flood insurance. Attorney Mike Cerulo – Baty, Holm, Numrich & Otto, PC (314) 863-6274. Wise v. HSBC; Case No. 4:15-cv-911 In United States District Court, Eastern District of Missouri Eastern Division.
Retained by policyholder counsel as a Property Insurance Expert to analyze Agents Errors & Omissions and Insurance Bad Faith claims handling issues. Case required analysis of underwriting vs. subsequent denial of a theft claim based on occupancy levels less than vacancy clause requirements. Nayeb v. Travelers, et al; Cause No. 15-05862-442 In The 442nd Judicial District Court Denton County, Texas. Attorney Jeff Atkins, Fell Law Firm (972) 488-8177.
Engaged by counsel for policyholder as their Agent Errors & Omissions and Insurance Bad Faith expert. Case involved analysis of Property and Inland Marine insurance placement issues relative to Livestock mortality for dairy cattle. Dispute arose after claim denial for widespread smothering loss of cattle during a blizzard event. Attorney Brent Hamilton, Brady & Hamilton, LLP (806) 771-1850. CBJ v. Davis; Case 2:16-cv-00109-J In The United States District Court For The Northern District Of Texas, Amarillo Division.
Engaged by policyholder counsel to analyze Agent Errors & Omissions issues regarding failure to procure available NFIP flood insurance. Case involved client request for flood insurance followed by agent initially providing faulty Elevation Certificate/Flood Zone information, and later failing to follow agency procedures regarding offering flood insurance. After an epic flood virtually totaled the client’s bed & breakfast facilities, the Commercial Property carrier denied the claim based on the flood exclusion. Attorney Molly Bowen, Mostyn Law, (832) 964-4830. Chimney Valley Lodge v. Newmark Insurance Services, et al. Cause No. CV08077: 2016EF2833 In the District Court of Blanco County, Texas, 33rd Judicial District.
Engaged by policyholder counsel as their designated expert for Agents Errors & Omissions and Insurance Bad Faith to evaluate issues regarding failure to procure proper insurance coverage. Case involved claim denial of a large wood kiln fire loss due to improperly structured Property. Boiler & Machinery and Business Income Insurance. Attorney Brady Rife, McNeeley Stephenson Attorneys (317) 825-5110. Kustom Kilns v. Nuthak, In Shelby County Superior Court I, State of Indiana, Cause No. 73D01-1502-CT-5.
Engaged by defense counsel as their Flood Insurance expert. Case required analysis of NFIP regulations and flood insurance rating for 23 lots deemed to be in FIRM Zone AE following FEMA flood zone map revisions. Claim included allegations by homebuilder of lost property values due to Inverse Condemnation based on FEMA’s revised Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Attorney Mike Shaunessy – McGinnis Lochridge & Kilgore, LLP (512) 495-6061. Woodlake v. Guadalupe County; Cause No. 11-1270-CV In The District Court Of Guadalupe County, Texas, 25th Judicial District.
Engaged by agent’s defense counsel as their designated expert for Agents Errors & Omissions and Insurance Bad Faith. Case involved Property and Business Income Insurance written on a Surplus Lines basis. Dispute resulted from hailstorm claims adjusted on a Per Location/Per Occurrence Wind and Hail deductibles basis. Hipoint v. Pathfinder, et al, Case No. Case No.5: 13-cv-687-D In The United States District Court For The Western District of Oklahoma. Attorney Jim Secrest, Secrest Hill Butler & Secrest, PC (918) 494-5905
Engaged by plaintiff counsel to evaluate Agents Errors & Omissions and Bad Faith issues from a Commercial Property policy cancellation. Litigation resulted from a premium finance company failing to notify the mortgagee of policy cancelation for nonpayment, followed by a total windstorm loss to an apartment complex. Case required analysis of insurance industry standards for completing ACORD form applications and Certificates of Insurance. Attorney Grady Terrill, Craig, Terrill, Hale, & Grantham, L.L.P. (806) 744-3232. First Bank & Trust v. Guide One & AREA Insurance; Cause No. 2013-508,134 In The 237th District Court of Lubbock County, Texas.
Engaged by counsel defending allegations of Agents Errors & Omissions for “failure to procure”. The case required evaluation of Homeowners insurance underwriting standards for Replacement Cost vs. Actual Cash Value policies. Attorney Samantha Horner (816) 979-1522, Case Linden P.C. Blow v. Fairchild Insurance Services, Case No. 14CV31 In The District Court of Pottawatomie County, Kansas.
Engaged by policyholder counsel as their Homeowners Insurance Expert to review allegations of bad faith claims handling resulting from total denial of a theft loss. Case involved contrasting coverage and valuation issues for contents insured as personal property or under inland marine fine arts coverage. Attorney Ned Pillersdorf (606) 886-6090, Pillersdorf, DeRossett and Lane. Dye vs. Kentucky Farm Bureau Insurance Company; Floyd Circuit Court, Civil Action No. 13-CI-529
Engaged as consulting expert by counsel defending against allegations of Agent Errors & Omissions. Case involved client expectations of coverage for “business risk tax liability”. Claim was denied under Commercial General Liability, Property and Inland Marine policies. Boat Town v. Belter Insurance Agency; Cause No. D-1-GN-10-003327 In The District Court of Travis County, Texas, 53rd Judicial District. Attorney Darrell Cockcroft, Thompson Coe Cousins & Irons, LLP (512) 703-5094.
Engaged by counsel defending allegations of bad faith for both Managing General Agent E&O and carrier claims handling practices. Dispute resulted from denial of ‘Well Out of Control’ and pollution claims from a ‘plugged & abandoned well’ fluids release. Case required analysis of an Energy Exploration & Development policy relative to first party property and third party pollution liability coverage. Denbury Resources v. Lloyds of London, et al; Cause No. 2012-10397 In The District Court of Harris County, Texas, 270th Judicial District. Attorneys Bart Hall and Jonathan Womack, Phelps Dunbar LLP (504) 566-1311.
Engaged by defense counsel to analyze allegations of Agents Errors & Omissions for “failure to assess and update” and “underinsured” values on a Homeowners policy. The dispute resulted following a total loss during the 2011 Bastrop, TX fires. Case involved knowledge of agent standard of care relative to duty of inquiry. Attorney Brad Douglas (512) 807-2474, Naman Howell Smith & Lee, PLLC. Rizk v. Koehler-Barton Insurance Agency; Cause No. 28,787 In the District Court of Bastrop County, Texas, 335th Judicial District
Engaged by defense counsel for Surplus Lines broker as their Agent Errors & Omissions and Insurance Bad Faith expert. Case required analysis of Property, Flood Insurance and Business Income claims issues relative to Statements of Value, Margin Clauses and Scheduled vs. Blanket policies. Litigation resulted from disputed values during flood claim settlement. Attorneys David Clark and Jack Urquhart, Beirne, Maynard, & Parsons, LLP (713) 623-0887. Menard v. Wells Fargo and Swett & Crawford; Civil Action No. 10-cv-7592, State of Wisconsin Circuit Court Milwaukee County.
Engaged by defense counsel as their Flood Insurance and Agent’s Errors & Omissions expert. Case required analysis of Insurance Bad Faith allegations resulting from claim denial for Flood Zone A locations. Claim included loss of Property and Business Income under an Inland Marine policy form. Attorney Tom Cooper, Pignato, Cooper, Kolker, & Roberson, P.C. (405) 606-3333. Coast to Coast Power Sports v. Robert Bates Agency, et al; Case No. CJ-2012-03555 In The District Court In And For Tulsa County, Oklahoma.
Retained by carrier counsel as their Insurance Bad Faith and Property Insurance Expert relative to claims handling Customs and Practices. Case required underwriting expertise when moving coverage from an admitted market Inland Marine builders risk to a Surplus Lines vacant dwelling policy. Litigation resulted when large water loss claim was denied due to vacancy disclosures on the insurance application. Pennink, et al v. Lloyds, et al; Case 1:11-cv-00673-TDS-WWD, North Carolina Durham County In The General Court of Justice Superior Court Division File No. 11-CVS-5555. Attorney Jeremy Stephenson, McNair Law Firm, P.A. (704) 347-6456; Attorney Jon Dryer, Wilson Elser Attorneys (215) 606-3908.
Retained by counsel defending agent against allegations of Agent Errors & Omissions and Insurance Bad Faith. Litigation resulted following claim denial of a grain bin explosion loss. Engagement required Property Insurance and Surplus Lines expertise. Martinek v. Hertel, et al; Cause No. CV-12-0103 In The District Court of Grayson County, Texas, 59th Judicial District. Attorneys Tom Culpepper and Angela Caffey, Thompson Coe Cousins & Irons (214) 871-8200.
Retained by policyholder counsel as their Property Insurance Expert to analyze Insurance Bad Faith claims handling issues. Case required expertise with water damage loss and vacancy permits on a Surplus Lines policy. Quackenbush v. Scottsdale; Case No. 2:12-cv-190-J In United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Amarillo Division. Attorney Dusty Stockard, Stockard, Johnston & Brown, PC (806) 372-2202.
Engaged by agent’s defense counsel as their Agents Errors & Omissions, Insurance Bad Faith, Business Income and Property Insurance Expert for multiple Hurricane Ike apartment complexes claims. Case involved Surplus Lines, standard of care, and disclosure of material facts relative to coastal windstorm deductibles. Landco v. Consolidated American Services; Cause No. 2010-23329 In The District Court Harris County, Texas, 281st Judicial District. Attorney Kevin Madden, Kane Russell Coleman & Logan PC, (713) 425-7452.
Engaged by mortgagee’s counsel as their Insurance Agent Error & Omission and Property Insurance Expert. Case required evaluation of agent’s conduct regarding placements, renewals and endorsements of three Inland Marine Builders Risk policies. Allegations by mortgagee of Insurance Bad Faith arose from agent’s misrepresentations on ACORD. Evidence of Property Insurance forms. Attorney David Clement – Clement, Gates & May (504) 598-2220; Baronne v. Assurance Co. of America, et al; Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana, Number: 09-4893 Division “I-14”.
Consulting expert engaged by counsel for carrier and surplus lines agent pursuing recovery from retail agent. Case involved placement issues for a Food Borne Illness policy covering Trade Name Restoration, Loss of Business Income and Incident Response. Following claim denial for an E-coli outbreak, litigation resulted from retail agent’s “failure to disclose material terms” to restaurant franchisees enrolled under a Master policy. Lloyds and Professional Liability Insurance Services v. IMA of Kansas; Cause no. D-1-GN-10-004172 In District Court of Travis County, Texas, 353rd Judicial District. Attorney Christopher White, Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP (214) 722-7100.
Engaged by carrier’s defense counsel as their Insurance Bad Faith, Business Income and Property Insurance Expert. Case required evaluation of claims handling practices relative to partial denial of water damage and mold claims based on a wear and tear exclusion. Eagles Nest Church v. State Auto Insurance, et al; Cause No. 096254334-11 in The 96th Judicial District Court, Tarrant County, Texas. Attorneys Charles Mitchell and Ray Palmer, Naman Howell Smith & Lee, PLLC , (817) 509-2025.
Designated as a Property Insurance Expert by policyholder counsel to evaluate claims handling custom & practice. The litigation resulted from Hurricane Rita windstorm damage to a hotel and subsequent claim investigation by carrier. Engagement included review of Insurance Bad Faith issues on the part of a Surplus Lines carrier. Cause No. 12,426; S.A. Hospitality v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, In the 1st Judicial District Court, Sabine County, Texas. Attorney Chris Leavitt, The Buzbee Law Firm, (713) 223-5393.
Retained by carrier’s counsel to provide expert opinions regarding Insurance Bad Faith, reporting form Inland Marine Builder’s Risk and Property Insurance. Dispute involved Agent Errors & Omissions based on agent’s failure to include a mortgagee’s interest when reporting a total fire loss. Seven months after the total fire loss, the agent issued an ACORD Evidence of Property Insurance to the mortgagee, continuing a pattern of misrepresentations. Attorney Larry Fields, Kutak Rock, LLP (816) 960-0090. Assurance Company of America v. O’Connor Insurance Agency; Case No. 4:10CV2204 FRB, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri Eastern Division
Engaged as a Property Insurance Expert by counsel defending allegations of Agents Errors & Omissions and Insurance Bad Faith. Litigation resulted from construction agreement insurance requirements, Inland Marine Builders Risk claim denial, and eventual Homeowners subrogation. Attorney Desmond Cooks, (214) 736-9433 The Willis Law Group; Stevens v. Trujillo Insurance Agency; Cause No. 048-248921-10 In the District Court of Tarrant County, Texas, 48th Judicial District.
Engaged by policyholder’s counsel as its designated expert for Property Insurance, Agents Errors & Omissions and Insurance Bad Faith. Case involved analysis of claim denial issues based on a vacancy clause. Spring Center v. AGCS Marine Insurance Company, et al; Cause No. 2011-09454 In the 11th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. Attorney Brant Durrett, Durrett Law Firm, (713) 623-6881.
Retained by policyholder counsel as their Property Insurance Expert to examine Agents Errors & Omissions and Insurance Bad Faith issues. Assignment required expertise with coinsurance penalties applied to claims under a Surplus Lines policy written on a Functional Replacement Cost basis and allegations of failure to disclose material facts. Oklahoma & Texas Panhandle Compress v. Aycock & Fowler Insurance Agency; Cause No. 2010-552,281; In The 72nd Judicial District, Lubbock County, Texas. Attorney Brad Parker, Parker McDonald, P.C., (817) 503-9200.
Engaged by defense counsel for carrier as their Property Insurance Expert. Case required review of carrier’s claims handling practices relative to policyholder allegations of Insurance Bad Faith. The dispute involved carrier claims investigation and claims handling practices following a total fire loss. Majestic Flowers vs. State Auto Insurance, Cause No. 37309; In the 82nd Judicial District Court of Falls County, Texas. Attorney for carrier Charles B. Mitchell, Jr., Naman Howell Smith & Lee, PLLC , (817) 509-2025.
Designated as Agents Errors & Omissions, Insurance Bad Faith and Property Insurance Expert to evaluate policy renewal and claims handling practices. The dispute involved windstorm claims from Hurricane Ike and aspects of failure to disclose Replacement Cost vs. Actual Cash Value. Woodforest Baptist Church v. Scottsdale Insurance Co., et al, No. 2009-37563 in District Court, 157th Judicial District of Harris County, Texas. Attorney for insured Mark Beausoleil, (936) 336-6275.
Engaged by policyholder counsel as their Inland Marine and Property Insurance Expert. Litigation resulted from partial claim denial following the armed robbery of a jewelry store. Claim denial hinged on effective date of an endorsement to increase a Jewelers Block policy limits. Case required evaluation of Agent Errors & Omissions, Surplus Lines procedures and Insurance Bad Faith claims handling. Eagle Jewelry v. United National Insurance Company, et al; No. 2009-50936 In The District Court of Harris County, Texas, 334th Judicial District. Attorney Bob Tarics, The Tarics Law Firm, PC, (713) 461-9490.
Engaged by policyholder counsel as their Boiler & Machinery and Property Insurance Expert. Case required analysis of Difference-in-Conditions coverage, Business Income and Insurance Bad Faith regarding carrier’s claims handling practices. Case involved Boiler & Machinery cause and origin review of pressure vessel implosion at a Chlor alkali plant near Las Vegas, NV. Olin Chlor Alkali Products v. Continental Casualty, et al, Case No. 2:10-cv-00625-GMN-RJJ in United States District Court for the District of Nevada. Attorney Lorie Masters, Jenner & Block LLP, (202) 639-6076.
Designated as policyholder’s expert for Property Insurance, Business Income, and Agent’s Errors & Omissions. Case issues included building & contents valuations and Ordinance or Law coverage following a total fire loss in Metairie, LA. Cardinale v. Goza, et al; Civil Action No. 09-4181 in United States District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, Judge Section “N”, Magistrate 4. Attorney Greg Dupuy, Dupuy & Dupuy Attorneys (504) 831-4833.
Engaged as a Property Insurance Expert by policyholder seeking coverage for Hurricane Ike Builders Risk claims. Case included allegations of Insurance Agent Error & Omission and carrier Insurance Bad Faith. Case required expertise with construction agreements relative to ordinance and law coverage, large Wind and Hail deductibles, and Business Income soft costs under Inland Marine builders risk policies. Attorney Windell Snow (316) 263-5959; Construction Services Bryant v. Cincinnati Insurance Company, Case No. 09 CV 3137 in the Eighteenth Judicial District Court, Sedgwick County, Kansas, Civil Department.
Designated by policyholder counsel as their Agents Errors & Omissions, Insurance Bad Faith and Property Insurance Expert. Engagement required expertise with blanket insurance, coinsurance vs. Agreed Value, Business Income, Wet Marine Insurance, and Surplus Lines custom & practice. Claim dispute followed after multi-million dollar flood damage to the largest marina on Lake Texoma. Lake Texoma Highport, LLC v. Lloyd’s of London, et al; Civil Action No. 4:08cv285; In The United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Texas, Sherman Division. Attorney Bart Higgins – Shields, Britton, Frazier (972) 788-2040.
Designated by plaintiff counsel as Property Insurance, Flood Insurance and Agent’s Errors & Omissions expert. Case involved DIC, inaccurate NFIP Flood Zones, and flood coverage omitted from property insurance policy schedules. Cummins Northwest v. PLW, INC., et al, No. CV-09-334-HA; US District Court for the District of Oregon. Attorney David M. Brenner, (206) 389-1773, Riddell Williams, P.S.
Designated by counsel for policyholder as their Flood Insurance and Property Insurance Expert. Case required analysis of excess flood Business Income, funding excess flood deductibles with NFIP policies, and the effect of ‘Other Insurance’ policy language. Attorney Wendy O’Connor, Tallman, Hudders & Sorrentino, P.C., (484) 765-2274. Pine Grove Manufactured Homes v. Indiana Lumbermens, et al; Civil Action No. 3:08-CV-1233, US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.
Case included Agent Errors & Omissions and Insurance Bad Faith allegations by the carrier seeking to recover claim payments for a total fire loss. Engaged by counsel for MGA and carrier as their Property Insurance & Homeowners Insurance Expert. Attorneys Jeanie Tate Goodwin & Jerry Kimmitt (713) 917-0888, Legge, Farrow, Kimmitt, McGrath Attorneys; TSG Insurance & Lloyds London v. Nickes Insurance, Cause No. 2008-76081, 189th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas.
Engaged as Property Insurance Expert by a property owner following a fire loss. Case required knowledge of coinsurance, Agents Errors & Omissions, Insurance Bad Faith and Business Interruption. Fuller v. Ramey King and Northfield Insurance; Cause No. 352232972, 352nd Judicial District Court of Tarrant County, Texas. Attorney Barry Hasten, Hasten & Hansen Attorneys, (817) 429-0956.
Retained by policy holder counsel as their Property Insurance Expert for a total fire loss to a dwelling. Case required analysis of Insurance Agent (Broker) Errors & Omissions issues and distinguishing Homeowners and Builders Risk coverage forms. Attorneys Bill Klain & Kevin Estevez (480) 947-1911, Lang & Baker, PLC. Cantor v. Farmers Insurance, et al Case No. CV2008-053871 & CV2008-052618 in Superior Court of the State of Arizona, County of Maricopa.
Designated by plaintiff counsel as their Property Insurance Expert regarding a total loss due to Hurricane Wilma. Provided analysis pertaining to Agent Error & Omission. Case issues involved Florida Windstorm insurance, Business Income and Surplus Lines Insurance placement. Scott Katz & Beth Berry, Butler Pappas Attorneys , (813) 281-1900. TCB Farms v. Oswald Trippe, et al; Case No. 07-1389-CA, Twentieth Judicial Circuit Court, Collier County, FL.
Designated by plaintiff counsel as a Flood Insurance and Property Insurance Expert. Flood claim was denied after Tropical Storm Allison flooded a large apartment complex in Houston, TX. Provided coverage analysis for Agent Error & Omission, Business Income and Surplus Lines Insurance coverage issues. Meg Las Villas v. United States Fire; Cause No. 2007-54444, Harris County, TX. Attorney Paul Allred, (214) 528-9560, Sullivan & Holston.
Designated by plaintiff counsel as their Property Insurance Expert regarding a horse barn insured under a Farm & Ranch Owners insurance program. Case involved the barn being significantly underinsured after a tornado caused a total loss. Runyon v. Goetz Insurors, et al; Case No. CJ-2005-3716 in District Court for Oklahoma County, State of Oklahoma. Attorney Joe Carson 405-604-5581, Buxton | Carson, PLLC.
Retained by policyholder to negotiate a machine shop total fire loss claim with the carrier. Policyholder was General Machined Products; carrier was Sentry Insurance Company. Engagement required Property Insurance ACV and RC calculations of difficult to value inventory, analysis and calculations for Business Income and assessment of potential bad faith claims handling. Settlement was finalized through the Appraisal process. Attorney Craig Crockett, The Crockett Firm PC (817) 810-0400.
Designated as Business Income and Property Insurance Expert by plaintiff counsel regarding coverage denial for Flood and Windstorm, damages resulting from Hurricane Katrina. Delta Land & Title v. State Farm Insurance Company; Civil Action 06-5374; Section L, Mag. 1; United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Attorney Peter Koeppel (504) 598-1000.
Engaged by defense counsel as their Agent Errors and Omissions, Property Insurance and Insurance Bad Faith Expert. Case required expertise with Business Income, Flood Insurance, Surplus Lines & Ocean Marine Insurance. Litigation resulted from partial claim denials for losses during Hurricanes Jeanne and Francis. Attorneys Larry Montgomery & Lee Chase, Glankler Brown, PLLC ( 901) 525-1322 . Dyer Investment Company, LLC, et al v. Marsh & McLennan and Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s; Case No. 05CV2812-D/P in the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee Western Division.
Plaintiff engagement as their expert for Property Insurance, Agent Errors & Omissions & Business Income. Litigation involved a total fire loss to underinsured building and Business Personal Property. Attorney Jeff Stewart – Seikaly & Stewart, Attorneys, (248) 723-5120. Trojan Cleaners, et al v. The Regency Insurance Group, et al; Case No. 2006 611590 CK 6 611590 CK, State of Michigan Wayne County Circuit Court.
Engaged by counsel for plaintiff as an expert for Property, Flood, and Business Income Insurance and to assist with carrier Bad Faith claims handling issues. This case involved Flood Zone determinations and prior Flood claim payments. Attorney John Gabroy – Gabroy Rollman & Bosse, PC (520) 320-1300. Eurofresh v. Travelers Indemnity Company; US District Court for The District of Arizona, Tucson Division, No. CIV 04-6 79 TUCRCC.
Retained by counsel for Successor Federal Receiver as their Property and Homeowners Insurance expert regarding a total fire loss to an uninsured vacant dwelling. Case issues included responsibilities of Receiver in regards to insurable interest. Attorney Greg Ostfeld, Greenberg Traurig, LLP (312) 476-5056. Le Petomane v. J. Brian Hittinger, US District Court for The Northern District of Indiana, No. 2:98-CV-00012.
Retained by plaintiff as consulting Property Insurance Expert to analyze issues surrounding claim denial under an Inland Marine Builders Risk policy. Case issues included Additional Insured endorsements, policy exclusions, Agent Errors & Omissions, and carrier Insurance Bad Faith. Attorney Michael Kennedy – Casey Ciklin Lubitz Martens & O’Connell West Palm Beach, FL (561) 832-5900. Suffolk Construction v. Royal Indemnity Co., Brown & Brown, Inc., et al; Cause No. 502002CA012543, 15th Judicial District, Palm Beach County, Florida.
Case issues involved misrepresentation of material policy terms contained in proposal for hailstorm coverage. Retained as Property Insurance Expert by plaintiff counsel to offer opinion on Insurance Agent Errors & Omissions relative to Article 21.21 Section 4(11). Attorney Conrad Bodden – Cowen & Bodden Law Offices (956) 541-4981. Cowen, et al v. Robert Wade Sales, et al., Cause NO.2004-08-3923 in the 357th Judicial District Court of Cameron County, TX.
Engaged to assist defense attorneys answering alleged Agent Errors & Omissions. A fireworks explosion and fire resulted in multiple fatalities and widespread property losses. Allegations involved coverage placement disputes for numerous lines of insurance: Commercial Auto, Workers Compensation, General Liability Insurance, Commercial Umbrella, and Property Insurance. Attorneys Brent Cooper and Joyce Ondich – Cooper & Scully, PC, (214) 712-9500. Joseph M. Lamb, Jr. d/b/a Pyrotechnics by Lamb v. Britton-Gallagher, et al; Civil Action No. 2-04CV-400, US District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division.
Retained by Orix Capital Markets as their Property Insurance Expert. Litigation involves mortgage document(s) insurance language requiring borrower(s) to maintain Terrorism Insurance for mortgaged properties post 9-11-01. Attorney Talmage Boston – Winstead Sechrest & Minick, PC (214) 745-5462; Attorney Amy Howell (214) 237-2000. ECF North Ridge v. ORIX Capital Markets; Cause No. 04-7956-G, 134th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas.
Retained by plaintiff to provide forensic insurance analysis of coverage and premiums. Case involved issues of agent negligence over multiple policy years in placing Workers Compensation, Products Liability Insurance, Commercial Umbrella, and Property Insurance. Attorney – Craig Albert of Godwin Gruber Attorneys (214) 207-6901. Aurora Equipment v. Arthur J. Gallagher & Co.; Cause No. 04-07955-E; 101st Judicial District Court of Dallas County, TX.