Practice/Industry Group Overview
Fineman Krekstein & Harris’s insurance practice involves representing insurers in a wide variety of matters. The firm understands the need for insurers to receive a prompt and efficient risk management assessment, which forms the foundation of the strong relationship we have developed with the insurers that we represent.
Whether the matter is simple or complex, we strive to provide the carriers with thorough analysis to enable a quick resolution or adequate time to prepare a case for trial. As a service to our clients, we have also created the Medicare Secondary Act Payer Blog.
Over the years we have represented carriers in the following specialized areas:
- Agents and Brokers
- Business Disparagement
- Business Torts
- Commercial Vehicles
- Dram Shop
- Errors and Omissions
- Garage Keeper’s Liability
- Life, Health and Disability
- Premises Liability
- Products Liability
- Professional Liability
- Property Damage
- Regulatory Affairs
- Won summary judgment on behalf of a car rental company in a personal injury action where the plaintiff alleged that he was struck by a vehicle owned by car rental company while crossing the street. Plaintiff claimed the vehicle fled the scene following the accident. The defense successfully argued that Plaintiff failed to produce sufficient evidence to show that the vehicle involved in the accident was owned by the car rental company since Plaintiff was not able to recall the license plate number nor any other identifying information. In addition, the defense provided information to show that the rental car alleged to have been involved in the accident had been returned to the rental car company thirty minutes prior to the accident.
- Represented a store owner in a personal injury case in which plaintiff alleged that she was struck in the head by an overhead metal gate as she attempted to leave the store. Investigation revealed several inconsistencies regarding Plaintiff’s explanation of how the accident occurred. The defense successfully argued that it was impossible for the metal gate to move on its own and a defense award was issued at a court mandated non-binding arbitration. Plaintiff did not appeal the arbitration award.
- Represented the lessor of an electric burden carrier cart in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. The burden carrier cart struck a union worker who alleged that the cart was negligently maintained and that he suffered permanent and debilitating injuries as a result of the accident. Utilizing a variety of liability and damages experts, the firm successfully reduced exposure and obtained a settlement well below plaintiff’s original $5 million demand.
- Represented the manufacturer of an industrial disposable wiping material machine in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. Plaintiff alleged, in part, that he sustained severe burns and injuries across his body as a result of the machine’s defective design. The firm was able to reduce potential exposure by demonstrating culpable conduct via a defendant and obtained a favorable settlement.
- Obtained summary judgment on behalf of a leasing company sued as a result of a multiple fatality motor vehicle accident. Plaintiffs alleged that the leasing company’s failure to maintain its own insurance policy on the vehicle made it responsible under a state statute requiring such companies to have insurance to pay for the damages caused by the driver of the vehicle. The court agreed with the leasing company and ruled that noncompliance with the statute did not create a private right of action by the Plaintiffs.
Articles Authored by Lawyers at this office:
The Smart Act and Its Impact Upon Medicare Claims By Pro Se Claimants
Jay Barry Harris, October 07, 2013
The 2013 Smart Act was motivated by a mutual frustration of plaintiff attorneys, defense attorneys, and insurers in attempting to settle claims in which the claimant was a Medicare beneficiary. It was difficult to settle cases without knowing exactly how much Medicare was owed, the process of...
Court Grants Declaratory Judgment in Insurer’s Favor, Enforcing Claims Made Policy’s $100,000 Sublimit for Insured’s Illegal Actions (Philadelphia Federal)
, September 26, 2013
In Camico Mut. Ins. Co., v. Heffler, Radetich & Saitta, LLP, the insurer sought a declaratory judgment relieving it of its duty to provide a defense to the insured under a claims made policy, asserting that a $100,000 policy sublimit applied to the claims against the insured. The insured filed...
Federal Flood Insurance Program Makes Several Changes to Flood Manual
Jay Barry Harris, May 15, 2013
As the result of recent congressional legislation, several changes to the National Flood Insurance Program Flood Insurance Manual became effective on January 1, 2013. The Flood Manual is used primarily by insurance carriers and agents that sell and service federal flood insurance. Several...
Governor Christie Calls Federal Flood Insurance Program a “Disgrace”
Jay Barry Harris, May 15, 2013
On February 5, 2013, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie addressed the media and complained that the Federal Flood Insurance Program has been extremely slow to address claims brought in the wake of Hurricane Sandy. According to Gov. Christie, 70% of cases remain unresolved, even three months after...