Experience
Anonymous Plaintiff v. Insurance Company
Plaintiff filed suit for benefits under a life insurance policy. The carrier denied coverage because the policy terminated and the reinstatement application was still pending when the policyholder passed away. We removed the case to federal court and obtained summary judgment, defeating a cross-motion for summary judgment which attempted under a state supreme court decision to have coverage bound upon tender of the application. After briefing and oral argument, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for the carrier.
Anonymous Plaintiff v. Self-Insured Large Corporation
We handled multiple Scott-Pontzer claims for Self-Insured Large Corporation, including one lawsuit alleging seven figure damages. All claims were appropriately denied or dismissed based on arguments as to the inapplicability of the Scott-Pontzer line of cases to self-insureds. We also filed an amicus curiae brief in the Ohio Supreme Court arguing the same and urging reversal of Scott-Pontzer. The court then abandoned Scott-Pontzer in a contemporaneous case.
Anonymous Plaintiffs / Claimants v. Insurance Company
Serving as national counsel, we provide coverage opinions and advise carrier as to appropriate and consistent claims handling for multiple property claims, including hurricane, wind, fire, vandalism, water damage, hail, and similar perils. Where applicable, we manage local counsel and help shape strategy for discovery, briefing, trial, and settlement. We have defended depositions, defended subpoenas, and mediated claims on the client's behalf. We also directly defend such claims regionally. We have performed similar functions as national coordinating counsel for mold, Y2K, and liability/casualty claims.
Anonymous Plaintiffs v. Debt Purchaser
We serve as national coordinating counsel for Debt Purchaser in the appropriate handling of consumer debt collection and the defense of FDCPA and related litigation, including class action litigation. We manage local counsel and coordinate all aspects of litigation.
Capital Plus, Inc. v. Parker Enterprises, et al.
Obtained judgment in excess of $2 million, plus punitive damages in excess of $2.1 million, costs and attorneys' fees in a complicated commercial transaction. The verdict was upheld upon appeal to the 1st District Court of Appeals.
City
Successfully prosecuted multiple property annexations for City in front of County Commissioners, including appeal to Court of Common Pleas.
City / Village v. Property Owners
Tried eminent domain suit to conclusion. Jury award in between both sides' fair market value expert testimony. In separate cases, successfully defeated challenge to right-to-take before settling.
Farmer, Executrix v. Meuser, Executor - Will Contest
Represented several family members of the deceased, who challenged his will as being the product of lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence. The trial court instructed the jury that the appropriate standard to prove undue influence and testamentary capacity was the stricter standard of clear and convincing evidence, rather than the preponderance of the evidence standard typically applied in civil lawsuits. The Court of Appeals ruled in favor of our clients on this issue and decided that the proper standard of proof in undue influence and testamentary capacity cases is preponderance of the evidence rather than the stricter clear and convincing evidence.
Gaskill v. Robbins - Division of Marital Property
Represented client in division of marital property in what would become a landmark case in the Kentucky Supreme Court. The client was a sole practitioner in oral surgery, and following a divorce, the dispute centered around the distinction between personal goodwill and enterprise goodwill in the division of the oral surgery practice. The Supreme Court ruled that goodwill of a professional practice is divided into personal goodwill and enterprise goodwill, and only enterprise goodwill is considered marital property for division in a divorce.
Geneva Hager v. Large National Insurance Company
Our firm defended a large national insurance company on claims that it violated the Kentucky Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act in implementing claim handling processes for casualty claims involving soft tissue injuries arising from minor impact automobile accidents which the plaintiff contended were improper. Class certification was denied, and thereafter the insurance company won a defense verdict in a highly publicized trial of the bad faith claim of the individual plaintiff who had sought $1.45 billion in damages.
Kelley v. Fedde - KY Child Custody
There was an appeal of a motion to modify child custody. The trial court granted a change in child custody without allowing an oral hearing on the motion. The Court of Appeals ruled that our client was entitled to an oral hearing before any ruling on modifying child custody was allowed.
Kentucky Employers Mutual Insurance Co. v. Coleman
Obtained a writ of prohibition from the Kentucky Supreme Court who in a published opinion directed the trial court to dismiss a bad faith action against a workers compensation insurance carrier and ruled that all such claims are subject to the exclusive remedy provision of the workers compensation statute. (Kentucky Employers Mutual Insurance Company v. Coleman, 236 S.W.3d 9 (Ky. 2007).
Knott, et al. v. Boone - Breach of Fiduciary Duties
Represented horse syndicate members in breach of fiduciary duties dispute regarding syndicate manager’s accountings. Court of Appeals ruled that syndicate manager could not rely on the instructions of one partner to apply partnership assets to a non-partnership debt.
Knott, et al. v. Boone - Breach of Fiduciary Duties / Fees
Represented horse syndicate members in breach of fiduciary duties dispute with syndicate manager. The syndicate manager charged late fees on the member's account that exceeded Kentucky usury law. The late fees were removed as in violation of usury laws and the Court of Appeals further determined that the syndicate manager owed a fiduciary duty to keep accurate accounts.
Mattlin Holdings LLC v. First City Bank, 2010 Ohio 3700 (Ohio App. 10th Dist. 2010)
Dinsmore & Shohl handled the defense on behalf of Defendants, Fifth Third Bank ("Fifth Third") and JP Morgan Chase ("Chase"). This is an important precedent for the banking industry in Ohio in that the appellate court refused to extend the discovery rule to toll the statute of limitations under O.R.C. § 1303.16(G) for a UCC conversion claim against two banks. In particular, the Appellants asserted a UCC conversion claim pursuant to O.R.C. § 1303.60 against both Fifth Third and Chase for the alleged conversion of a check in the amount of $795,486.00. Appellants’ conversion claims, however, were filed over four and one-half years after the alleged conversion by both Fifth Third and Chase. The Appellants argued, among others, that the discovery rule should toll the statute of limitations because Appellants did not discover the alleged conversion until after the statute of limitations had expired and because the Appellants had asserted fraud-based claims against other defendants, but not against Fifth Third or Chase. In response, Firth Third and Chase argued that the discovery rule does toll the statute of limitations and that even in cases where fraud-based claims are asserted, the UCC claims against other defendants cannot be coupled with such fraud-based claims for purposes of tolling the statute of limitations.
The Tenth District Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's dismissal of Fifth Third and Chase and held that the three-year statute of limitations for conversion under Section 1303.16(G) is not tolled by the discovery rule. Both the appellate court and trial court cited to and relied upon the holding of the U.S. District Court from the Northern District of Ohio in Metz v. Unizan Bank, (N.D. Ohio 2006), 416 F. Supp. 2d 568, 579. Both courts also cited to the holding in Loyd v. Huntington Nat'l Bank (N.D. Ohio 2009), 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51858.
Click HERE to view the Tenth District Court of Appeals decision.
Osborne v. Town Square Bank - Will distribution
Represented children of deceased in will distribution dispute, where one of our clients was executor of the will. Widow, the deceased's wife by a second marriage, received will bequests before trying to renounce will. The Court of Appeals ruled that the will couldn’t be renounced once the widow received bequests from under the will.
Prime Contractor v. Owner and Project Engineer
Obtained multi-million dollar settlement for Prime Contractor in large, complex action against Owner and Project Engineer for delay, interference, breach of contract, and related claims. The case involved significant electronic and paper discovery, extensive deposition practice, extensive motion practice, multiple experts, complex case management methods, and varied methods of alternative dispute resolution.
Product Liability Litigation
The Kentucky Supreme Court in a unanimous opinion held that the doctrine of equitable estoppel did not bar a product manufacturer’s statute of limitations defense because of the manufacturer’s alleged concealment of product defects from governmental regulatory agencies. The Court also held that the discovery rule would not be extended to cases not involving latent injuries or illnesses, or professional malpractice.
Regional Insurance Company v. Local Manufacturer
I obtained favorable rulings from the trial and appellate courts on the insurer's duty to defend certain underlying intellectual property claims. The underlying claims involved trade dress infringement, patent infringement, and unfair competition. The coverage issue arose because one of our client's insurance policies provided coverage for certain trade dress claims, among other types of advertising injury. I obtained summary judgment on the duty to defend, served as co-counsel in conducting a trial on damages issues, and then was the lead author of the brief that prevailed in the First District Court of Appeals.
Superintendent of Insurance v. Insurance Company
Served as principal outside counsel to the Superintendent of Insurance as statutory liquidator of a failed property and casualty insurance company. Work has mainly consisted of assisting the Liquidator's assets collection efforts and the prosecution of litigation on behalf of the Liquidator against various debtors of the insolvent insurer and parties responsible for the failure of the insurer. The litigation has included suits against the insurer's: directors and officers, insurance liability carrier for the directors and officers, employee theft insurance carrier, parent and affiliated companies, financial auditor, and various of the insurer's agents and high deductible insureds. In addition to assisting the Liquidator in prosecuting claims against others, we have assisted the Liquidator in defending claims against the liquidation estate, including lawsuits and claims filed by the Bankruptcy Trustee of the insurer's parent company, claims filed by another insurance company, and assessments made by the IRS. Also have assisted the Liquidator in running out the affairs of the insurance company, such as terminating the insurance company's pension plan, and in administering the liquidation proceeding, such as developing the statutorily required early distribution plan for state insurance guaranty funds.
- Page 2 of 2