Tag Archive for: todd-chamberlain

Jury Rejects $12 Million Demand Against M&C Client

/in

Following a five-week trial in plaintiff-friendly San Bernardino County Superior Court, a defense verdict was reached in a case involving a boat crash on the Colorado River. Partners Russell S. Wollman and Todd A. Chamberlain of Murchison & Cumming represented the boat manufacturer. Congratulations also to Darin W. Flagg, Senior Associate, for his law and motion contributions to the trial victory.

The incident occurred when the driver of the power boat lost control at speeds between 60 and 80 miles per hour, resulting in the loss of control upon hitting a wave. Subsequently, the boat nosedived, causing it to come apart in the front and eject the plaintiff into the water, resulting in a fracture to his thoracic spine.

The plaintiff filed a lawsuit citing negligence on the part of the boat driver and alleging negligence and certain product liability against the boat itself. The plaintiff sought substantial compensation, totaling $12 million dollars.

After a thorough deliberation period lasting five days, the jury returned with a defense verdict, finding no fault on the part of either defendant. The plaintiff’s claims have been dismissed, and no damages have been awarded.

Murchison & Cumming Names Four New Partners and One New Associate Partner

/in ,

Murchison & Cumming, LLP is pleased to announce Todd A. Chamberlain, Steven J. McEvoy, Mary C. Trinh, and Bryan J. Ure have been named Partners and James N. Kahn an Associate Partner. “We are very happy to welcome Mary, Steven, Todd and Bryan as Partners in the firm and James as an Associate Partner,” said Managing Partner Dan L. Longo. “We look forward to their contributions to the firm and service to our clients for many years to come.”

Mr. Chamberlain is based in the Los Angeles office and focuses his practice on representing insurers in connection with coverage issues arising out of construction defect and product liability matters, commercial liability, carrier v. carrier contribution actions, disputes involving Cumis counsel and prosecuting and defending declaratory relief actions. Mr. Chamberlain also provides advice in risk management and has represented numerous insurers in high exposure mediations and arbitrations.

Mr. McEvoy is based in the Los Angeles office and focuses his practice in the areas of transportation law, product liability, toxic tort and general liability defense. He specializes in the handling of matters involving bus and motor coach roll-over accidents with catastrophic injuries and wrongful death. Mr. McEvoy was recently named a “Southern California Rising Star” by Super Lawyers Magazine. Only 2.5% of lawyers are named to the list, which consists of lawyers 40 years old and younger or practicing 10 years or less.

Ms. Trinh is based in the Los Angeles office and specializes in the area of medical malpractice, and has achieved successful results in the defense of physicians, healthcare facilities and outpatient surgical centers. Her other areas of practice include general liability matters, landlord-tenant habitability claims, and skilled nursing facilities. Ms. Trinh has defended and obtained favorable outcomes for a wide range of clients, including manufacturers, distributors, retailers, and property owners.

Mr. Ure is based in the Las Vegas office and is experienced in all phases of litigation involving a diverse mix of matters. A significant part of his practice focuses upon cases deemed as complex litigation or with high damages exposure. In addition to providing litigation defense, Mr. Ure values offering practical solutions and advice to his clients aimed at reducing liability and risk. In recognition of his experience and efforts, Mr. Ure has been recognized by Nevada Business Magazine as a Legal Elite top attorney for the second consecutive year.

Mr. Kahn is based in the Los Angeles office and focuses his practice on general liability, product defect and premises liability defense. He is experienced in handling a wide array of personal injury matters, public entity defense, business/commercial litigation, and intellectual property. Mr. Kahn has produced significant results for large companies as well as small businesses and individual proprietors. Mr. Kahn enjoys problem solving and provides an aggressive yet straightforward approach to defending his clients.

About Murchison & Cumming, LLP
With a firm history dating to 1930, Murchison & Cumming, LLP is a premier, AV-rated civil litigation firm with five offices in California and Las Vegas, whose attorneys specialize in the defense of domestic and international businesses, insurers and individuals, at trial and on appeal. The firm’s attorneys also handle employment matters and business transactions. The firm is a member of the USLAW and Insuralex Networks.

Court Finds in Favor of Manufacturer in Insurance Case

/in

The Orange County Superior Court found in favor of Murchison & Cumming’s client, an appliance manufacturer, in an insurance litigation case. Friedrich W. Seitz and Todd A. Chamberlain represented the defendant. The client was sued by an insurance company for declaratory relief and breach of contract.

In 2007, the insurance company and the manufacturer entered into a settlement and release agreement resolving a series of bad faith lawsuits against the insurer for its failure to defend the manufacturer in multiple toxic tort cases in Pennsylvania. The settlement agreement expressly applied to the manufacturer and all current subsidiaries and contained an indemnity provision in favor of the insurer. When a former subsidiary of the manufacturer was later sued in an Orange County toxic tort case, the insurer contended that the agreement had released that claim and that the manufacturer was obligated to indemnify the insurer for the costs it incurred in defending the former subsidiary under the indemnity provision. The defendant filed a cross-complaint against the insurer for declaratory relief and breach of contract.

The court found the plaintiff’s reading of the agreement tortured and convoluted and that the defendant’s interpretation of the agreement was supported by common sense, consistent with the mutual intent of the parties. The court also awarded the defendant $367,000 in damages and costs against the insurer.

Summary Judgment Granted in Million-Dollar Coverage Case

/in

Todd A. Chamberlain won a significant Motion for Summary Judgment on behalf of Markel International in the Alameda Superior Court before Judge Richard Keller.

The case was brought by California Capital Insurance (“CCI”) against Markel International, Citation Insurance and their mutual insured, Roosevelt Owyang and Lumianda, LLC. The insured owned a number of apartments in Oakland and was sued for negligent maintenance, premises liability, habitability and nuisance claims by more than 40 current and previous tenants.

CCI agreed to defend the insured under a reservation of rights. Markel denied coverage on a number of grounds and declined to participate in the defense and settlement of the insured because there was no coverage or potential for coverage under its policies. In particular, Markel denied coverage because of the absence of property damage or bodily injury during their policy periods and the insured’s knowledge of the claims prior to inception of the Markel policies.

CCI settled the underlying case for $1.3 million, incurring more than $500,000 in defense costs, and later sued Citation, Markel and the insured for reimbursement and indemnity. Along with interest, CCI claimed it was more than $2 million out of pocket. CCI settled with the insured and Citation, and sought at least half of the balance of approximately $2 million from Markel. The carriers then filed cross-motions for summary judgment.

The court granted M&C’s motion with a judgment in favor of Markel and denied CCI’s motion.

Carolyn A. Mathews assisted with the moving and opposing papers, particularly on the Personal Injury Coverage B “wrongful invasion” portion of the argument which figured in the decision.

Sub-contractor’s Liability Insurer Wins Summary Judgment

/in

Todd A. Chamberlain and Daniel G. Pezold successfully filed a motion for summary judgment on behalf of Employers Fire Insurance Company in an insurance contribution action. .

Employers Fire insured a HVAC sub-contractor whose employee was seriously injured in a fall from a two- story construction site ladder when a shipping bracket camouflaged as a ladder rung gave way. The employee settled the liability case for $2.1 million. .

The insurers who funded the settlement then brought claims for implied indemnity and contribution against Employers and others for reimbursement of the settlement monies. The theories advanced by the insurers included claims that the general contractor was an additional insured under Employers policy. The defense filed a motion for summary judgment on behalf of Employers, asserting that the additional insured certificate and endorsement was issued the day after the accident and thus provided no coverage for the additional insured, or standing for the HVAC sub-contractor’s insurer against Employers.

After a hotly contested hearing, the court granted the motion for summary judgment finding as a matter of law that the general contractor was not an insured under the policy at the time of the accident barring any coverage under the HVAC sub-contractor’s liability policy.