SDV focuses completely on insurance coverage litigation. In recent years, the firm has obtained excellent results for its clients. The following is a small sample of the types of cases handled and the results achieved by the SDV team.

1. Jordan Construction v. St. Paul Travelers

Case tried to jury verdict in Riverhead, N.Y. in favor of client, prime contractor, responsible for worker’s fall, which resulted in broken back and two broken legs.

Issue: Notice to insurer twenty-two months after fall when suit was filed. Insurer denied coverage due to late notice. Verdict for policyholder client for indemnity and defense fees.

Recovery for client: $2,000,000.00

2. Turner Construction Company v. Ace Property & Casualty Co.,

429 F.3d. 52 (2d Cir. 2005)

General contractor wins coverage in federal appeal for water damage to partially complete convention center under builders risk policy without application of wind deductible despite exclusion for rain damage.

3. Turner Construction Company v. Kemper Insurance Company,

No. 05-4195-cv (2d Cir. 2005)

General Contractor wins federal appeal for coverage as additional insured under subcontractor policy even though subcontractor was found not liable in underlying $30,000,000.00 property damage claim due to fire.

4. Town of Essex v. Serge Doyen, et al

CV II Connecticut Superior Court, Docket No. MMX CV-02-0098622-S

Secured full defense from title insurer and successfully tried case to jury.

Issue: Ownership dispute with municipality over title dating from 1803.

5. Client A v. Insurance Company of North America

The case was filed in federal district court in Connecticut. The claims against INA included breach of contract, bad faith and breach of fiduciary duty.

Issue: Whether INA improperly misclassified claims brought against client as general liability instead of completed operations, resulting in a premature exhaustion of insurance coverage.

Recovery for client: $6,000,000.00

6. Client B v. CNA, et al.

Action filed in Texas state court against 38 insurance companies claiming coverage for defense and indemnity from insurers of client’s subcontractors in connection with underlying project which gave rise to mold claims for bodily injury and property damage.

Issue: Whether 38 insurance companies improperly denied defense and indemnity to additional insured general contractor and whether there was coverage for bodily injury, property damage, and completed operations under additional insured endorsements.

Recovery for client: $8,700,000.00.

7. Client C v. Insurance Company of North America

Action filed in state court in Pennsylvania seeking a declaratory judgment as to the rights and duties of the parties regarding subcontractor’s claim for defense and indemnity growing out of a complex construction case in San Diego, California.

Issue: Whether INA’s claimed allocation to multiple triggered policies, resulting in multiple deductibles, and INA’s claim for reimbursement for non-covered claims should be upheld. Case settled in favor of client on both issues.

8. Client B v. Liberty Mutual and AIG

Issue: Whether there was insurance coverage for supplementary payments and pre and post judgment interest on multimillion-dollar product liability judgment.

Recovery for client: $2,300,000.00

9. Client C v. CIGNA

Issue: Whether there was insurance coverage for civil contempt.

Recovery for client: $650,000.00

10. Client D v. CIGNA, Home, Travelers

Issue: Whether there was insurance coverage for environmental contamination at multiple sites.

Recovery for client: $20,000,000.00

11. Client E v. Security Insurance

Issue: Whether there was insurance coverage for asbestos liability.

Recovery for client: $17,000,000.00

12. Client F v. CHUBB Insurance

Issue: Whether there was insurance coverage for sick building syndrome.

Recovery for client: Summary judgment entered in favor of Client F.

13. Client G v. Fireman’s Fund

Issue: Whether there was insurance coverage for property damage/completed operations.

Recovery for client: $100,000.00

14. Client H v. Centennial & Atlantic Mutual

Issue: Whether there was insurance coverage for advertising injury and antitrust.

Recovery for client: $750,000.00