Gregory J.Newman

Representative Matters

• Obtained outright dismissals of insurance company clients in multiple multi-million dollar construction defect, bad faith and contribution lawsuits throughout the United States without a penny being paid.
• Recovered millions of dollars prosecuting equitable contribution claims for insurance company clients in multiple cases, without having to file a single lawsuit.
• Successfully defended an insurance company client from a class action lawsuit for breach of contract and bad faith in Federal Court, by demonstrating to the court via simultaneous motions to strike and dismiss, that the claims were without merit and that a class action was unsustainable. (2015 WL 1266787)
• Successfully defeated a contribution action by another insurer based upon "exclusive defense" language in the insuring agreement of the excess policy, when the Court of Appeal upheld the granting of a motion for summary judgment on behalf of the insurance company. This was an issue of first impression in California and remains the only Court of Appeal decision to date to address the issue.  Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 891 / 116 Cal.Rptr. 2d 174 [depublished].
• Successfully obtained a trial court order finding that an insurer was not obligated to defend a general contractor as an additional insured in an underlying construction defect suit under an additional insured endorsement that limited the coverage available to "liability arising out of [the named insured's] ongoing operations."
• Successfully defended an insurance carrier client from an action for breach of contract and bad faith (by assignment), when the Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court decision that upheld an express requirement in the policy that the property damage “first take[] place during the policy period.” Plaintiff failed to make this showing. The court also rejected plaintiff's argument that the property damage might have continued into the policy period, upholding the policy language stating that “[a]ll ... property damage arising from an occurrence shall be deemed to first take place at the time of the first such ... property damage, regardless of the date of manifestation, ... even though the nature, type or extent of such ... property damage may be continuous, progressive, cumulative, changing or evolving.” The Court of Appeal also rejected the plaintiff's argument that the insurer was estopped from asserting its coverage defenses. (2014 WL 6783153)
• Successfully defended insurer against a suit seeking contribution towards sums incurred in defense and indemnity of a mutual named insured and mutual additional insured in multiple underlying construction defect cases. Obtained an order following summary judgment upholding an express statement in the insuring agreement that limited the insurer's defense duty to the named insured and only if "no other insurance affording a defense against such a suit is available to"  it. Successfully argued that cases addressing the "other insurance provisions in the Conditions section of policies do not apply.  The court also agreed that no obligation to defend the additional insured existed, because an additional insured cannot be entitled to greater coverage than a named insured.
• Successfully defended an insurance carrier client in a direct action by its named insured for bad faith over a denial based upon a Contractors Special Conditions endorsement that had never been tested in the United States. Non-suit was granted to client after plaintiff's close of evidence.
• Successfully obtained summary judgment for an insurance carrier client in a direct action by an additional insured for bad faith in Federal Court over a denial based upon policy language that had never been tested in the United States (2008 WL 755823).
• Instrumental in successfully negotiating to a conclusion the largest construction defect action in the history of Oregon on behalf of an insurance company client.

Insurance Seminars

• Mixed Use Developments and Conversions
• Independent Counsel Issues under California Civil Code 2860
• Wins and Losses on the Additional Insured Front
• Ongoing Operations v. Completed Operations – What is the Difference
• Contractual Indemnity - The Subcontractor, G.C./Developer and Carrier Perspectives
• When Do CGL or Homeowner Policies Respond to Worker's Compensation Claims?
• Per Claim v Per Occurrence - Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions 
• Carrier Intervention and How Liability Issues Impact Coverage
• Avoiding Trials through Intervention
• Types of Coverage; CGL CCIP / OCIP, Claims Made; Additional Insured Issues
• Covered Damage Assessments under CGL Policies
• Claims Adjustment Training under CGL Policies
• Wrap-Up Policies
• Fair Claims Settlement Practices Act – Certifications
• Understanding and Defending Mold Claims