Focus. Determination. Strategy. Results.
SIGNIFICANT TRIAL RESULTS
Sargent and Lundy v ISLIC
State Court, Chicago, Illinois. Ed Ruberry represented a Crum & Forster entity in the longest insurance coverage trial in the history of Cook County. The case involved nuclear power plants in Ohio, Kentucky and Illinois, and required 161 trial days over the course of five years to complete. The plaintiff sought over $100 million in damages. The case is under a protective order.
Chicago, Illinois. Ed Ruberry obtained a $2.8 million dollar verdict on behalf of a law firm against a client in a fee dispute case. He also obtained a defense verdict as to the multi-‐million dollar counter claim in which the client sought fees they had already paid.
(…Environmental Counseling and Litigation continued from page 6)
Among the cases we have tried is Hercules Chemical Company v. Underwriters at Lloyds, London, et al., Superior Court of New Castle County, Delaware. This environmental coverage trial, which lasted 16 weeks, involved claims of over $200 million with respect to environmental contamination left from production of Agent Orange. Our firm acted as lead counsel for a group of carriers with a sudden and accidental pollution exclusion, and after conducting the key expert examinations and cross-examinations and making closing arguments, our clients prevailed before a jury, a verdict sustained by the Delaware Supreme Court.
Most recently, we successfully resolved a large multi-party case involving perchloroethylene groundwater contamination resulting from dry-cleaning operations. We have handled numerous claims and coverage disputes arising from underground storage tanks containing petroleum as well as larger tank farms operated by chemical manufactures; as part of the petroleum tank claims we have successfully brought subrogation claims against State UST reimbursement funds, which provide another source of recovery for petroleum claims in most states, as well as a few states such as North Carolina which provide for dry cleaning operations as well. We are currently representing an insurer in a mult-million dollar case in California involving numerous perc releases from dry-cleaning operations, where issues of contractual indemnity and coverage thereof under Vendors Endorsements are also at issue.
Superior Trial Defense in Mass Tort Litigation
Company v Employer’s Casualty Federal Court, Huntsville, Alabama. Tried a case in Decatur, Alabama on behalf of Westchester, an excess carrier, against a primary carrier for failure to settle within policy limits. After a one month trial, the jury returned a verdict on behalf of Westchester for $900,000, the maximum amount that could be awarded under the contract.
Continental Western Ins. Co. v
Foxfire Townhomes Owners Association Inc. Polk County, Iowa, and Iowa Court of Appeals. After trial, state court held that liability insurance did not provide coverage for repair and replacement costs associated with allegedly defective roof work claims. The court held that defective construction work alone does not constitute an “occurrence” causing “property damage” under client’s GL policy. The Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed and further review denied.
Our trial defense group is one of the finest in Illinois, as confirmed by statistics maintained by the Illinois
Consequently, plaintiffs’ lawyers are aware of our reputation and we are routinely able to negotiate either voluntary dismissals of our clients in the early stages of litigation, or highly advantageous settlements. This proves to be a highly beneficial tactic for our clients who have been named as a defendant in mass tort litigation.
In mass tort litigations, plaintiffs’ lawyers are notorious for naming a bevy of defendants in hopes of leveraging a global settlement. Using our trial experience, our firm is able to take a zealous approach at the outset of the litigation in order to reverse the plaintiff’s leverage and create a favorable settlement environment for our clients. We have successfully used this strategy in defending clients against product liability claims
consumer products, pharmaceuticals, and electronic products. In addition, we have developed expertise in toxic tort litigation involving a wide variety of production processes and chemicals including asbestos, benzene, pesticides, PCB’s and dioxin. Further, we have successfully defended our clients in claims arising out of alleged exposure to black mold, lead-containing
T h e R u b e r r y G r o u p ’ s r e s o l u t i o n - o r i e n t e d
focus begins with our initial review of each case. We stand out among law firms in our attention to early evaluation. Rather than providing a general discussion of the facts and law, our initial analysis of a case will advise of multiple litigation strategies and provide a realistic exposure evaluation with attention to cost/benefit considerations. Our attention to detail continues throughout our handling of each claim. We ensure that our clients are actively kept apprised of all litigation activities, rather than providing them with lengthy and mundane quarterly reports. In short, we take pride in providing the very best defense counsel to
each of our clients.