My Portfolio (0) A Client-Centered Commitment to Excellence

Innovative Advocacy for Our Clients.

Liability, Insurance, Subrogation, and Recovery

Parties involved with construction projects usually attempt to allocate and shift certain risks of loss or claims amongst one another via contractual provisions and by requiring various types of insurance coverage as a condition of working on a project.  When a claim arises, it is necessary to evaluate and enforce our clients’ rights under their contracts and the applicable insurance policies to ensure that the appropriate parties bear the costs associated with defending or resolving the claim.  Our attorneys regularly analyze and enforce our clients’ rights under other parties’ commercial general liability and other insurance policies, including their rights as additional insureds under such policies.  When our clients, their insurance carriers, or their sureties elect to resolve a claim, we also handle subrogation and recovery actions against the parties responsible for such claims.  Our experience evaluating and enforcing insurance rights and claims is a critical advantage for efficiently and appropriately handling construction claims and lawsuits.

 

 

 

 

Recent News

Florida Supreme Court Declines to Adopt Florida Legislature’s Daubert Amendment
For many years Florida followed the Frye standard for the admissibility of expert testimony based upon new or novel scientific evidence.  See Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923).   In 2013, the Florida Legislature, through what has been dubbed the Daubert Amendment, replaced the Frye standard with the Daubert standard.  The Daubert standard stems from the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), which established the federal court standard for expert testimony.  Since then, federal courts have continued to apply the Daubert standard, and 36 states have adopted the Daubert standard.

Read More

October 21, 2013
Motor Vehicle Dealer Bonds: Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal Punts on Attorneys' Fees Issue

Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal recently had the opportunity to provide much needed guidance on the issue of whether a statutory motor vehicle dealer bond caps the surety’s liability for plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees at the penal sum of the bond.  Unfortunately, the court found another issue to be dispositive and declined to rule on the attorneys’ fees issue. 

Read More

October 21, 2013
Southern District of Florida Upholds the Bond Pre-Claim Terms as Conditions Precedent to Filing a Claim Against a Surety

In Arch Insurance Company v. John Moriarty & Associates of Florida, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-22403-RNS (S.D. Fla. December 12, 2016), Arch Insurance Company (“Arch”) sued John Moriarty & Associates of Florida, Inc. (“Moriarty”) seeking a declaration that there was no coverage under a performance-and-payment bond (“Bond”) that Arch issued on a project naming Moriarty as the obligee.  Moriarty was the general contractor and sought $995,239.83 from Arch, under the performance side of the Bond, related to alleged shortfalls of the subcontractor/principal.

Read More

October 21, 2013