- Litigation & Dispute Resolution
|University ||University of Connecticut, B.A., Psychology, magna cum laude, 2000|
|Law School||University of Connecticut School of Law, J.D., 2003|
|Admitted||2003, Connecticut; 2004, District of Connecticut; 2006, Second Circuit Court of Appeals; 2011, Massachusetts|
Connecticut Bar Association
New London Bar Association
|Born||Bethpage, New York, October 11, 1978|
Tracy Montalbano is a member of the Firm's Insurance and Litigation Practice Groups. Tracy's practice focuses on insurance coverage litigation and business litigation, including cases involving complex contractual and extra-contractual claims. In addition, she also defends insurance agents pursuant to errors & omissions liability policies. Based upon her experience, she routinely provides coverage advice to insurance company clients.
Prior to joining Halloran & Sage, Tracy worked for a small litigation firm where she obtained significant litigation experience in a wide range of personal injury actions, including motor vehicle, wrongful death and medical malpractice cases.
Connecticut Court Finds No Coverage for Eminent Domain Action
Insurance Law Update, 04/25/2014
Tracy Montalbano and Brian Rich named CLT New Leaders in the Law
Halloran & Sage Insurance Law Group member Tracy L. Montalbano provided insight to NBC Connecticut's Troubleshooters, as they explored the accident rate of snow tubing at the Woodbury Ski Area.
Tracy Montalbano is a dedicated runner, having completed 3 marathons, 8 half marathons and many other races. Tracy has combined her love for running with a commitment to the American Cancer Society and has raised thousands of dollars in connection with its DetermiNation initiative.
In addition to running, Tracy is also an avid equestrian and has competed in horse shows in Connecticut, Vermont and Florida over the last five years on her horse, Mister October.
|Reported Cases||Representative Matter: Appellate Court Rules on First Impression Case: MCS-90 Endorsement in Insured's Policy was Not Triggered and Insurer was Not Liable for Payment of Underlying Judgment Halloran & Sage's insurance law group obtained an appellate victory in a case involving an issue of First Impression in Connecticut. In Martinez v. Empire Fire & Marine Ins. Co. , ___ Conn. App. ___ (Slip. Op. June 24, 2014), the Appellate Court held that an insurer did not have an obligation to pay an underlying judgment against its insured. Specifically, the Appellate Court held that the MCS-90 Endorsement appended to the policy issued by the insurer was not triggered since the insured's vehicle, which was not listed on the insurance policy, was not being operated as a for-hire motor carrier at the time of the accident. In so holding, the Appellate Court applied the trip-specific approach, which the majority of courts have adhered to when determining the applicability of the MCS-90 Endorsement. On that basis, the Appellate Court ruled in favor of Halloran & Sage's client, Empire Fire & Marine Insurance Company, on its alternate ground for affirmance. Currently, certification has been granted in this case and the Connecticut Supreme Court will be reviewing the decision. Perkins v. Hermitage Ins. Co. , 2013 WL 951373 (Conn. Super. Ct., J.D. of Ansonia-Milford, February 13, 2013 (Matasavage, J.) Obtained summary judgment on behalf of insurer-client in a lawsuit involving contractual and extra-contractual claims stemming from an assault at a bar. Northeast Utilities Serv. Co. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. , 3:08-CV-01673 CSH, 2012 WL 2872810 (D. Conn. July 12, 2012) Successfully defended an excess insurer in lawsuit alleging a breach of the duties to defend and indemnify. Trez v. International Water Safety Foundation, et al. , Docket No. FST-CV08-5008779-S, Memorandum of Decision, dated December 9, 2010 (Mottolese, J.) Obtained favorable verdict following a court-side trial in an action against an insurance agent and agency. Harris v. Hermitage , 2009 WL 3740666 (Conn. Super. Ct., J.D. of Hartford at Hartford, October 13, 2009) (Aurigemma, J.) Obtained summary judgment on behalf of insurer-client in a lawsuit involving contractual and extra-contractual claims stemming from an assault at a bar. Arrowood Indem. Co. v. Gen. Ins. Co. of Am. , 2010 WL 4885340 (Conn. Super. Ct., J.D. of New Britain, Nov. 3, 2010)(Young, J.) Cotoia v. Holmgren , 2005 WL 3624576 (Conn. Super. Ct., J.D. of New London, Dec. 15, 2005) (Jones, J.)|
|Profile Visibility |
|#335 in weekly profile views out of 4,435 lawyers in Hartford, Connecticut|
|#111,830 in weekly profile views out of 1,616,736 total lawyers Overall|