Gallivan, White & Boyd, P.A.’s Post

A recent report indicates a surge in attorney representation in liability claims nationwide, causing legal obstacles for the insurance industry. This increase is attributed to aggressive marketing by billboard lawyers and the growing presence of third-party litigation funding (TPLF). In 2023, the U.S. witnessed substantial growth in attorney representation for bodily injury claims, with a 17.2% increase for general liability and a 47.7% increase for auto liability compared to the previous year. In Florida, TPLF has had a pronounced impact on consumers, with a significant influx of over 280,000 new lawsuits filed in March 2023. Despite tort reform legislation targeting attorney fees, around 33,000 liability lawsuits were filed in Florida in May 2024. The expanding presence of third-party litigation funding in Florida has negative consequences, leading to an increase in frivolous or exaggerated claims and driving up costs for insurers and policyholders. https://lnkd.in/eAM2zjF4

A recent report indicates a surge in attorney representation in liability claims nationwide, causing legal obstacles for the insurance industry. This increase is attributed to aggressive marketing by billboard lawyers and the growing presence of third-party litigation funding (TPLF). In 2023, the U.S. witnessed substantial growth in attorney representation for bodily injury claims, with a 17.2% increase for general liability and a 47.7% increase for auto liability compared to the previous year. In Florida, TPLF has had a pronounced impact on consumers, with a significant influx of over 280,000 new lawsuits filed in March 2023. Despite tort reform legislation targeting attorney fees, around 33,000 liability lawsuits were filed in Florida in May 2024. The expanding presence of third-party litigation funding in Florida has negative consequences, leading to an increase in frivolous or exaggerated claims and driving up costs for insurers and policyholders. https://lnkd.in/eAM2zjF4

Civil litigation is a vital tool for resolving disputes over matters like insurance claims, business contracts, consumer rights, or fraud allegations. It provides a formal avenue for asserting your rights or defending against unjust claims within the judicial system, ensuring fair consideration and adjudication of all parties' rights. 🖋️ The complexity of these cases, sometimes involving elements of criminal law, requires skilled legal representation. ⚖️ At Heban, Murphree & Lewandowski, LLC, our experienced team excels in managing a broad spectrum of civil cases in Ohio, from civil fraud and contract disputes to insurance and consumer law issues. 📜 If you’re facing a legal challenge, contact us to leverage our expertise and protect your interests effectively. 📅 https://bit.ly/2GJmt3u

Law firms are facing a new challenge as clients increasingly turn to suing their own lawyers. These suits can allege anything from conflicts of interest to failure to file important documents, and law firms are having to defend against these allegations with increasing frequency. In fact, insurance claims resulting in large payouts have been on the rise for law firms. According to a 2023 report by Ames & Gough, of the 10 companies that insure about 80% of Am Law 100 firms, seven paid out claims of over $50 million in 2021 or 2022. Two of those companies paid out claims that topped $150 million. As clients become more willing to turn on their lawyers, it's clear that law firms need to be prepared to defend themselves against potentially expensive lawsuits. https://lnkd.in/e5y46SeS

The Smith Mills Law Firm has a broad-based civil trial practice representing corporate and individual clients in several areas of litigation, including general insurance defense, auto accidents, wrongful death, premises liability, commercial disputes, insurance subrogation, defamation, products liability law, employment, and trucking litigation. Learn more at www.smithmillslaw.com #CivilTrialPractice #law #autoaccidents #wrongfuldeath #litigation #productliablity #generalinsurance #commercialdisputes #employmentlaw

June 7, 2024 For 17 years in a row, Wollmuth Maher & Deutsch LLP (“WMD”) has been recognized by Chambers USA as a leading law firm for business disputes in New York. In 2024, WMD again received Chambers’ recognition as a top-tier firm for Securities Litigation and an "esteemed" ranking in Insurance: Dispute Resolution. Chambers USA recognized WMD founding partners Dave Wollmuth and Bill Maher individually as tops in the field of Securities Litigation: Institutional Plaintiffs. Bill was again ranked Band 3 for Insurance: Dispute Resolution, a recognition of his broad expertise in resolving complex insurance disputes. Chambers USA quoted WMD clients as follows: Dave Wollmuth "gets things done cooly, calmly, and efficiently" and "is a first-class counselor." Bill Maher "is aggressive and fearless" and "an exceptional litigator." WMD "has demonstrated an intimate knowledge of the complexities of our case" and "[a]t every turn there is an expert ready to handle the challenge." About Wollmuth Maher & Deutsch LLP Wollmuth Maher & Deutsch LLP is a New York-based law firm with a reputation for high-stakes, complex litigation and bankruptcy work. WMD is known for its tenacity, legal prowess, and commitment to clients. WMD’s attorneys are dedicated to achieving the best possible results for our clients, utilizing a combination of deep industry knowledge, strategic problem-solving, and exceptional legal skill. WMD and its lawyers have consistently earned top marks from both clients and independent ratings services. Legal Advertising Disclaimer This post may be considered attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Legal Malpractice Claims Grow in Size as Clients Turn on Counsel in the US. Law firms are being targeted with increasingly expensive lawsuits, as large insurance policies, client resistance to paying fees, and the role of investors in litigation put legal operations on the defensive. Law firms are being hit with client suits that allege missteps such as conflicts of interest or failure to timely file a document. The clients bringing the suits are turning to attorneys who have developed specialties in suing law firms. Insurance Role Law firms’ appearance of being backed by deep-pocketed insurers helps make them malpractice targets, said Leslie Corwin, managing partner of Eisner LLP, who represents law firms in malpractice cases. “Most law firms have professional liability insurance and people know that,” he said. “Clients know that. It’s a matter of common knowledge.” Market pressures and economic turmoil also make law firms more vulnerable to legal attacks, Corwin said. Clients are more likely to contest a big bill when business is tough, he said. Firm v. Firm Lawyers who once hesitated to bring legal actions against the industry that employs them are taking cases today without fear of repercussions and reputational harm. Bill Reid, a lawyer on Musk’s team suing Wachtell, said attorneys used to fear bringing actions against law firms “in part based on the notion that they will soon become a pariah in the legal world and that other law firms won’t send them business.” But Reid said that hasn’t been his experience since he took on the work that “no one else was willing to do” two decades ago. Reid, senior founding partner at Reid Collins & Tsai, said that since launching the plaintiff-focused boutique in November 2009, the firm has netted at least $100 million in actions against law firms. More in the article (link in the comment). #lawyers #lawfirm #legal #malpractice #legalcosts #litigationfuding #litigationfinance

The Injuries Resolution Board welcomes the publication of the Central Bank of Ireland’s mid-year Motor Liability report today, which found that 81% mores claims are now being resolved by the Injuries Resolution Board as an alternative to litigation.   Some key findings: 👉 In the first half of 2023, the Injuries Resolution Board resolved 81% more motor claims than in H1 2022. 👉 With a record consent rate of 71% in 2023, the overall proportion of claims being resolved directly through the Injuries Resolution Board increased significantly to 20% of all motor claims in H1 2023. 👉 Although we resolved 20% of motor claims in H1 2023, we accounted for just 9% of the total claim costs, compared to 37% of motor claims that were settled through litigation, accounting for 79% of the total claim costs. The average legal fee was €564 through the Injuries Resolution Board vs €17,837 through litigation.   The Central Bank’s mid-year report on public liability claims finds that compensation award values are the same in the Injuries Resolution Board as you get if you go to litigation, despite cost and time of litigation being significantly more.   This highlights the value in using our impartial, independent assessment ad mediation services.   Some key findings: 👉 Claimants who settled a public liability claim valued under €150k through litigation incurred legal fees on average 22 times higher than through the Injuries Resolution Board, despite the average compensation being approx. €23,000 in both channels. 👉 The average time taken to settle a claim through the Injuries Resolution Board was 2.3 years compared to 5.7 years for claims settling through litigation. 👉 Overall, the average legal costs associated with resolving a liability claim through the Injuries Resolution Board was €893 in H1 2023, compared to €35,000 through litigation.

Legal Malpractice Claims Grow in Size as Clients Turn on Counsel - BloombergLaw article. #biglaw #legalservices #underwriting #insurance #malpractice #riskmanagement

BIPA Decision Update: Very significant development relating to the ability of claimants to force companies to arbitrate BIPA claims. The decision in Hoeg, et al. v. Samsung, et al, was issued on February 15 at the same time that Dan Cotter, Prathyusha Matam, and I were discussing BIPA as part of the The Chicago Bar Association Insurance Law Committee's webinar. In the attached opinion, Judge Harry Leinenweber of the Northern District of Illinois granted the petition of 806 claimants who sought to arbitrate BIPA claims against Samsung. Like many businesses, Samsung requires its customers to sign arbitration agreements which requires as follows: YOU AND SAMSUNG EACH AGREE THAT ALL DISPUTES BETWEEN YOU AND SAMSUNG RELATING IN ANY WAY TO OR ARISING IN ANY WAY FROM THE STANDARD LIMITED WARRANTY OR THE SALE, CONDITION OR PERFORMANCE OF THE PRODUCT SHALL BE RESOLVED EXCLUSIVELY THROUGH FINAL AND BINDING ARBITRATION, AND NOT BY A COURT OR JURY. After the claimants filed individual arbitration actions and met their administrative filing requirements, AAA sent an email to representatives of Samsung setting froth a list of each of the cases that were filed, notifying Samsung that the claimants had satisfied their initial administrative requirements, and setting forth Samsung's responsibility for payment of initial administrative filing fees totaling $311,000 within 30 days. Despite the terms of its agreement (which were surely not subject to negotiation with customers), Samsung refused to pay the initial administrative filing fees and AAA closed the cases on an administrative basis. The issue, then, before the N.D. Illinois was whether the claimants could compel arbitration proceedings under Section 4 of the Federal Arbitration Act after the arbitration was administratively closed due to the opposition's failure to pay its fees. Judge Leinenweber found that they could because, "Samsung's scheme is a quintessential refusal to arbitrate under Section 4." He continued, "As such, the Court orders [Samsung] to stick to its own terms and arbitrate Petitioners' BIPA claims. And despite Samsung's contentions, this Order can and does compel Samsung to pay the requisite fees as set by the AAA." This is significant because it provides further ammunition for BIPA claimants to force companies to consider early resolution rather than paying significant administrative fees (which are obviously in addition to all the other costs of litigation). It will be very interesting to see how this matter plays out and all companies with arbitration provisions should be keeping close tabs.