Insurance Coverage

Overview

Swift Currie’s insurance coverage practice provides seasoned counsel and litigation services to insurance companies and corporations throughout the Southeast. With millions of dollars at stake under tight deadlines, our attorneys draw on more than 750 years of collective experience to provide clients with the trusted advice they need to make the right business decisions. We work with C-level executives, vice presidents of claims, legal counsel and claims representatives for businesses and insurers to advise on insurance coverage, defend bad faith claims and litigate first-party and third-party insurance claims.

We understand the complexities of insurance coverage matters that arise because we have been there before. Swift Currie’s insurance coverage attorneys have handled more than 100 appellate cases and numerous jury trials. Upon evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of a particular coverage position, we devise options and strategies for how the company should proceed. We take a common-sense approach in recommending the course of action that will achieve the best result under the circumstances.

We focus on determining how insurance policies with property coverage or liability coverage apply to a claim, including:

Evaluating the legal and factual issues in insurance coverage disputes.
Conducting examinations under oath.
Providing formal written legal opinions on the existence and scope of insurance coverage.
Assisting clients with the selection of qualified experts.
Filing or defending declaratory judgment actions and other lawsuits.

On the first-party/property side, we are well-versed in the intricate coverage disputes that stem from natural catastrophes, business interruption, collapses, machinery failures, and loss from fires and theft. We counsel our clients about their duty to defend and pay in cases of significant injury, property damage, construction defects, advertising injury and business torts. We also represent insurance companies against other insurers (provided there is no conflict) and enforce tenders for them to defend and indemnify an insured party. Along the same lines, we also handle disputes involving excess carrier claims against primary carriers, analyzing these often high-stakes situations to determine what coverage exists and the extent and priority of the coverage. We then strategize with our clients to develop an approach that best serves and protects their interests.

Clients recognize our attorneys’ extensive experience in all types of insurance coverage matters. Our practice includes the vice chair of the insurance coverage section of the Defense Research Institute (DRI) and the top-ranked insurance lawyer in Georgia in 2017, according to Best Lawyers. Together, our team has been recognized as the best insurance practice team in Atlanta, and the annual U.S. News – Best Lawyers’ “Best Law Firms” list has included our practice since 2016, ranking us as Tier 1 in Atlanta, Tier 2 nationally and Tier 3 in Birmingham for 2019. Additionally, the Georgia Legal Awards, sponsored by the Daily Report, designated us as Insurance Litigation Department of the Year.

Experience

Eleventh Circuit upheld enforcement of one-year suit limitation provision in a multi-lines insurance policy for property losses not involving fire.
Eleventh Circuit enforced non-cumulation clause, holding that multiple claims and lawsuits over several years and policy periods arising out of the same product constituted a single occurrence.
Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment to an insurer in a “bad faith” or “negligent failure to settle” case under Georgia law.
Eleventh Circuit addressed priority of coverage among numerous primary and excess insurers, enforcing vertical tower of coverage and rejecting insured’s request for pro-rate horizontal coverage.
Complex notice of cancellation upheld by both Georgia Supreme Court (certified question) and Eleventh Circuit and all money returned to carrier in accident involving multi-claimants with severe injuries and wrongful death.
Eleventh Circuit enforced cooperation clause, prohibition against voluntary payments and suit/legal action provision against insured under Georgia law.
United States District Court addressed priority between two separate towers of coverage, requiring one tower to exhaust limits (including excel policy) before the other tower was triggered.