Excess and Surplus Lines

The excess and surplus market represents an important segment of the overall insurance industry, filling a key gap in the availability of coverage. With this type of insurance, the risks are often outside the box of what the standard carriers are comfortable writing. For example, the risks may have a claims history that make standard insurers unwilling to cover them or require payment of an unacceptably high premium. This may include coverage for a hole-in-one event, an amusement park, or an oil drilling operation.

The attorneys at Goldberg Segalla look both inside and outside the box to successfully resolve disputes arising out of excess and surplus lines coverage. We have extensive experience as monitoring counsel for excess and surplus lines insurers (both foreign and domestic), and we have successfully handled disputes over language in the Bermuda Form and other specialty risk policies. In addition, we have handled the regulatory needs of these carriers as well. Some of our recent engagements involved:

  • Risks that were materially misrepresented during the underwriting process, such as location, loss history, and prior cancellation
  • “Ultimate Net Loss” as defined under a policy
  • Equitable contribution claims
  • Successfully defending claims for third-party coverage that were, in fact, policyholder capital improvements
  • Assisting E&S carriers to become eligible nationwide
  • Advising the E&S market of significant changes in the rules of the various surplus lines stamping offices

Because of Goldberg Segalla's knowledge in the excess and surplus lines market, our attorneys are frequently called upon to assist in preparing pre-eminent treatises and articles in this area of the law. For example, we authored Chapter 80 of the New Appleman on Insurance Law Library Edition entitled "Lloyd’s in the United States" — highlighting important aspects of the regulatory and litigation environment in the United States where Lloyd’s and its members are concerned.

Representative Matters

  • We represented an E&S carrier following a multi-million–dollar settlement of a workplace accident claim. We intervened in a dispute between the contractor and property owner and pursued payment from the contractor's insurer, arguing it was primarily responsible for paying the settlement amount. On the eve of trial, we secured an extremely favorable recovery for our client.
  • Goldberg Segalla successfully represented and E&S insurer regarding a coverage action over a potential $8 million class action judgment alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. We represented the client in a declaratory judgment action, in which it obtained a summary judgment ruling that it did not owe a duty to defend or indemnify its insured.
  • Goldberg Segalla attorneys secured a favorable result for their client after moving to dismiss a plaintiff’s claim for UIM benefits. The plaintiff sought UIM benefits from his personal auto insurer and his employer’s auto insurer for serious injuries sustained while operating a vehicle owned by his employer. After moving to dismiss on the basis that the tortfeasor’s vehicle was not underinsured as a matter of law, the motion was so persuasive the plaintiff and the other insurer-defendant voluntarily agreed to dismiss all claims against our client with prejudice.