Obtained an award and Decree with a finding of no coverage pursuant to the Coverage Extensions offered under an auto policy involving use of the vehicle by a relative as an occupant who sustained serious injuries when being chauffeured in her mother’s vehicle by her then fiancé. The Court granted summary judgment on the grounds of the ‘regular use’ exception to the Coverage Extensions provided by the policy and due to the argument confining the use of the vehicle to operation only concluding there was duty to further defend the ongoing underlying lawsuit, and no duty to indemnify.
Received summary judgment in favor of insurer where insured backdated coverage by agreement of carrier to a date prior to a fatal motor vehicle accident without disclosing the accident. Despite no request for disclosure by the insurer, the court granted summary judgment pursuant to the ‘known loss doctrine’ allowing the insurance company to withdraw coverage and declaring no duty of indemnification.
Overcame newly developing theory of duty to provide assistance where insured sold/provided narcotics to woman who fatally overdosed. Prevailed on summary judgment on grounds of lack of occurrence and intentional/criminal act/controlled substances exclusion despite novel argument that causal relationship between subsequent harm and failure to render aid was actual cause of death, not initial supplying of narcotics. Court ruled insurer had no duty to defend and no duty to indemnify.
Successfully litigated a Declaratory Judgment action on behalf of an insurer obtaining a Decree of no coverage and no duty to defend where the insured engaged in a group harassment and assault of two gay men in Philadelphia County. The court declared no duty to defend the insureds based upon the lack of a defined ‘occurrence’ and the alternative application of the ‘criminal acts’ exclusion.
Prevailed on summary judgment establishing no duty to defend based upon claims of third party property damage arising from construction due to lack of occurrence pursuant to Miller’s Capital line of cases. Court negated duty to defend and indemnify in multiple lawsuits involving a residential development where insured served as subcontractor.