Edward P. Garson: Lawyer with Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP

Edward P. Garson


Peer Rating

Client Rating

Printer Friendly VersionEmail this PageDownload to My Outlook ContactsAdd lawyer to My FavoritesCompare this lawyer to other lawyers in your favorites

Experience & Credentials

Practice Areas

  • Appellate
  • Architects & Engineers
  • e-Discovery
  • Financial Institutions
  • General Liability & Casualty
  • Insurance Agents & Brokers
  • Municipal/Local Government
  • Securities
  • Securities Industry Professionals
  • Construction
Contact InfoTelephone: 415.625.9330
Fax: 415.434.1370
University Cornell University, B.S., 1975; State University of New York at Buffalo, M.A., 1976
Law SchoolGolden Gate University School of Law, J.D., with highest honors, 1980 Golden Gate Law Review, Editor
Admitted1980, California; U.S. District Court, Central, Northern and Southern Districts of California; U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Memberships & Affiliations

State Bar of California, Litigation Section


Ed Garson is a trial lawyer with experience in large, complex, high-exposure civil matters involving a wide range of issues, from professional liability and financial fraud to construction accidents and property damage.

A primary focus of Ed's practice involves the defense of construction liability and defect matters, with particular experience representing steel erectors and crane companies in personal injury, property damage and impact claims. Ed also has a significant practice defending insurance brokers and agents, architects and engineers, financial advisors, lawyers, and real estate brokers and agents in professional malpractice litigation.

Ed's litigation approach emphasizes early, cost-effective claims resolution, with the ability to go to trial if that strategy best serves the interests of the client. He has taken many cases to verdict, including trials lasting more than six months. He has appeared before California federal and state courts and argued appeals in the California Court of Appeals, California Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. He also has been admitted pro hac vice in the Territory of Guam and the State of Washington in order to try major cases on behalf of clients.

Prior to joining Wilson Elser in 1987, Ed was a deputy attorney general for the Office of the Attorney General for the State of California, Torts and Condemnation Division.


California Supreme Court


California Supreme Court Holds Design Professionals Owe a Duty of Care to Future Homeowners
July 11, 2014

Court Confirms the Limited Duty of an Insurance Broker to Procure Only Coverage Requested by the Insured
November 8, 2013


The Lessons of Brinker: The Status Meal Breaks In California
June 15, 2012

Edward Garson Moderates Panel at Construction SuperConference
January 10, 2012


Legal Insights Publishes Two Articles by Wilson Elser Partners
April 25, 2013

Castoria Writes Chapters for Agents of America e-Book, Insurance Agency Risk Management: A Comprehensive Guide to Avoiding E&O Claims
January 16, 2012

Reported CasesRepresentative Matters; Professional Liability - Insurance Broker; Defended insurance broker against allegations of professional negligence. Plaintiff shipping company sued its broker and insurance carrier following the denial of a claim for more than $10 million in property damage to its pavement and wharf caused by an earthquake. The policy was placed weeks before the earthquake but was delivered following the earthquake and contained an exclusion for wharves, docks, piers, pilings and pavement. A trial that lasted more than 100 days resulted in a defense verdict for the broker, but a general verdict against the insurance carrier for $12 million in compensatory and $11.25 million in punitive damages. Affirmed on appeal.Plaintiff, a cable television operator on the island of Guam that suffered extensive property damage following a severe typhoon, sued its broker and London underwriters for breach of contract, bad faith and negligence following the denial of a portion of the claim. We represented the London broker. After a trial before the district court in Guam that spanned more than eight months, the court issued a directed verdict in favor of Lloyds and the London broker.Professional Liability - Broker-Dealer; Defended broker-dealer in a financial fraud case involving broker's selling away of fraudulent bonds to approximately 65 plaintiffs. Matter settled with most of the plaintiffs prior to an eight-week trial, with the remaining plaintiffs settling favorably just following verdict.Slip and Fall; Plaintiff slipped on a downhill cart path at the Lake Course of the Olympic Club, injuring her knee. She alleged the cart path constituted a dangerous condition. Jury awarded a defense verdict after a two-week trial.Construction Liability; Defended a steel erection company against allegations of negligence arising when a 23-foot steel column fell onto a construction worker rendering him a quadriplegic. We were able to enforce the contractual indemnity and additional insured provisions of the contract, and the case settled on the first day of trial.Product Liability; Plaintiff, a cardiologist, fell over his handlebars when his rear brakes allegedly failed. He suffered bilateral wrist fractures and claimed he would eventually develop traumatic arthritis, rendering him incapable of performing his job. Settlement demand was in excess of $3 million. We represented the designer and manufacturer of a specialty brake. After a three week trial, the jury returned a defense verdict.General Negligence; Defended driver that rear-ended plaintiffs' car in a multi-vehicle accident. Plaintiffs were awarded $150,000 at arbitration, but sought a trial de novo. In a 9-3 verdict, jury found liability but awarded only $2,500 to both plaintiffs. The court later reduced the award to $0 on motion based upon plaintiffs' failure to do better than the arbitration award at trial.

Documents by this lawyer on Martindale.com

Subscribe to this feed

California Supreme Court Holds Design Professionals Owe a Duty of Care to Future Homeowners
John R. Clifford,Edward P. Garson,Ian A. Stewart, July 18, 2014
The California Supreme Court in Beacon Residential Community Association v. Skidmore, Owings and Merrill LLP (July 3, 2014), held - based on common law principles - that an architect owes a “duty of care” to future homeowners in the design of a residential building. (July 3, 2014), held...

Court Confirms the Limited Duty of an Insurance Broker to Procure Only Coverage Requested by the Insured
John R. Clifford,Edward P. Garson,Ian A. Stewart, November 11, 2013
Recently, in San Diego Assemblers v. Work Comp for Less Insurance Services, Inc. (October 4, 2013, CA Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District), the court upheld the granting of summary judgment on behalf of a broker on the grounds that it breached no legal duty to its client. The court rejected...

California Appellate Court Expands Rights to Homeowners in Construction Defect Cases beyond Remedies Provided in the California Right to Repair Act
John R. Clifford,Edward P. Garson,Ian A. Stewart, September 23, 2013
On August 28, 2013, the California Appellate Court (Fourth District) issued its ruling in the case of Liberty Mutual Insurance Company v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC (Case No. GO46731). Liberty Mutual filed suit against Brookfield to recover relocation expenses that it paid on behalf of its insured...
Profile Visibility
#1,876 in weekly profile views out of 19,753 lawyers in San Francisco, California
#197,503 in weekly profile views out of 1,539,846 total lawyers Overall

Office Information

Edward P. Garson

525 Market Street, 17th Floor
San FranciscoCA 94105-2725


Professional Networking for Legal Professionals Only

Quickly and easily expand your professional
network - join the premier global network for legal professionals only. It's powered by the
Martindale-Hubbell database - over 1,000,000 lawyers strong.
Join Now