Scottsdale, AZ., June 15, 2017: Resnick & Louis. P.C. is pleased to announce the addition of 5 new attorneys. The attorneys will be based in our NV, FL, AZ, and CA offices and include Caroline Molloy, Jordan Shidlofsky, Tracee L. Duthie, Alyssa A. Cina, and Kristi N. Davisson. “Our new attorneys have an excellent and established reputation in insurance defense, construction defect, professional liability, and premises,” says Mitchell Resnick, managing shareholder of Resnick & Louis. “They will expand our practice area providing services to clients, and broaden our expertise across all states.” The new attorneys include: Caroline Molloy has come to be known and respected as one of the top litigation attorneys in Southern California. Ms. Molloy is known for her powerful and aggressive interdisciplinary litigation practice, combining expert trial and courtroom advocacy skills with bold and decisive litigation strategies. Jordan Shidlofsky practice focused on construction defect litigation representing developers, general contractors, subcontractors, environmental consultants, product manufacturers and insurance carriers in a variety of contexts arising from the construction and use of real property. Tracee L. Duthie is admitted to practice law in both the State and Federal courts in Nevada. Her practice has been in general civil litigation, insurance defense litigation, additional insured litigation, construction defect litigation, personal injury, slip and fall, medical malpractice, product liability and HOA super priority lien. Ms. Duthie has successfully settled numerous multi-million-dollar litigation and has trial experience in district and justice court. She has advocated both in the defense bar and plaintiff arena. Alyssa A. Cina managed 10 staff personnel and supervised a caseload of 250 car accident and premise liability files from intake to negotiations. She has worked in the Fourth District Court of Appeals performing a variety of civil and criminal appeals. She has experience in personal injury and civil litigation.Read More
Jennifer A. Boldi, Partner at Resnick & Louis, will be speaking at the June 14-15th western conference for PLRB. She will be covering recent property case law updates. Review current coverage and case law trends and improve your ability to forecast court decisions Identify current regional issues and concerns in the property insurance field Use reasoning skills to apply policy provisions to factual scenarios Compare notes involving coverage challenges with other claims professionals from your region To sign up for the PLRB conference please click here.Read More
Excess, Umbrella, and multi-Insurer Coverages. Deductibles and Self-insured Retention policies; Control over Safety; Insurance Pricing in 2017. You’ll buy insurance this year for your transportation business, and perhaps a large percentage of it will be from multiple insurers. Pricing may be an issue (see below), or your clients may require certain policy features. Insurance policies themselves are always bilateral, not multi-lateral agreements. So, when you buy into a multi-insurer program, you should be aware of the gaps and inconsistencies that may occur. Your insurance broker is assembling a program that is complex, multi-layered, and multi-insurer. So ask a lot of questions. Never will two insurers jointly issue one policy that will provide whole coverage to you. But although policies are not multi-lateral that does not mean they operate only individually. Excess and umbrella policies, which you may need to fulfill customer demands, refer to other policies by their nature, generally calling them the underlying coverage – and are contingent in some ways on the provisions of that underlying coverage. A primary policy pays the first dollar of a covered claim, perhaps subject to your deductible or self-insured retention. You buy the primary and then add other policies that are excess of the primary as you deem necessary. An excess policy means the insurer only begins coverage after the pre-determined primary limits. Excess is available for just about all primary lines and there is no requirement you buy only from one underwriting company. An umbrella policy is more of a stand-alone excess policy that offers a bit broader scope than the primary. Umbrella policies stand out over plain excess covers: like an excess policy, umbrellas provide additional amounts of cover once the primary is tapped out; but umbrellas sit more broadly, and provide cover over other types of coverage, for example,Read More
Ken Peace joined Resnick & Louis three years ago and his experience and expertise have continued to grow and develop. Ken currently dedicates approximately 50% of his time handling general liability and bodily injury defense cases, many with exposure in excess of $1 million. Ken has been providing quality legal services to his clients since 1997. He has a wide array of general civil litigation experience including, but certainly not limited to Insurance Coverage, Insurance Defense, Premises Liability, Dram Shop, Commercial Litigation, Products Liability, Business Advice and Litigation, Probate and Trust Disputes, Elder Abuse, and Trustee and Private Fiduciary Advice and Litigation. Ken will be speaking at the Arizona Insurance Claims Association meeting this Thursday, February 16th. https://aicaonline.org/event/2017-february-monthly-meeting/Read More
Baseball has always had statistics. They’ve been studied to excess and its auditors have immense data directly related to every player. Not so with CSA BASICs. The FMCSA built CSA and it routinely lacks the complete data to reveal the behaviors the Agency – and insurers, and shippers – are interested in. What the Agency does instead is substitute stand-in data, or what we might call proxy data. They draw statistical correlations between a motor carrier’s type of operations and its potential for safety. These correlations discriminate. Whereas baseball stats pour in daily for more than 6 months a year; and they can feed back inconsistencies into the model, redefining it as they progress, CSA scores are static; there is no mechanism to correct errors (let’s not even bring up dataQ appeals). Conditions and outcomes change or evolve in court somewhat closer to the truth, so must the model the penalties are based on. CSA, cloaked as it is in a great deal of mystery, with only chance encounters delivering outsized results, relies heavily on a handful of “test” results, which is so very far from algorithmic modeling. But yet, CSA purports to predict outcomes – i.e., crashes. These “predictions,” unfortunately, guide the discussions of shippers, DOT inspectors, and insurers. There will always be miscalculations in CSA evaluations because the models used are just simplifications. No model can include all the world’s complexities or nuances of human behavior. Inevitably, a lot of important stuff gets left out – like communications in operations, variable ground conditions, and interactions with other parties, namely shippers and receivers. To be frank, CSA BASICs is a toy algorithmic model that abuses truckers who all operate on the slimmest of margins. The Agency makes choices about what’s important enough to include, simplifying the world of truckingRead More