Results

Skarzynski Marick & Black LLP attorneys Mike Marick and Joel Vander Vliet secured an appellate victory for Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Company affirming the lower court’s ruling on summary judgment entitling Grinnell to rescission.

Skarzynski Marick attorneys Michael Marick and Andrew Candela represented AXIS Surplus Insurance Company in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, which affirmed the summary judgment that AXIS has no duty to defend or indemnify its insured for multiple deaths arising from a tornado that struck an Amazon warehouse. The real estate developer of the warehouse, TriStar Companies LLC, sought its significant defense costs and indemnity under a policy issued by AXIS.

Skarzynski Marick & Black attorneys Ted Carleton and Juan Luis Garcia, representing Great American Insurance Company, obtained a favorable dismissal in a coverage action in the Delaware Superior Court.

Skarzynski Marick & Black attorneys Alexis Rogoski, Ted Carleton and Juan Luis Garcia, representing Freedom Specialty Insurance Company, along with other non-settling excess
insurers, obtained favorable rulings on summary judgment in the New York State Supreme Court for the County of New York.

The Appellate Court of Illinois published an opinion on April 7, 2020, affirming that Skarzynski Marick’s client did not have a duty to defend antitrust allegations under a CGL policy and that a policyholder’s potential liability in excess of limits did not create a conflict of interest.

Court enters judgment on the pleadings for Skarzynski Black client, ruling that claims were not made against CEO in his insured capacity and contract exclusion barred coverage for claims against company.

Skarzynski Black prevailed in an appeal of a summary judgment ruling that a settlement by an insured defendant was unenforceable against its insurer.

Skarzynski Black obtains a declaratory judgment ruling, on behalf of an insurer, holding that a D&O policy did not cover settlement payments in the nature of disgorgement.   

Skarzynski Black won summary judgment for Scottsdale Insurance Company on an apparel company’s crime coverage claim in federal court in Los Angeles on the ground that the executive who allegedly stole funds was not an Employee as defined in the Scottsdale policy.

Skarzynski Black won exclusion of a plaintiff’s expert report in federal court as insufficiently detailed to give fair notice of the opinions the expert would testify to at trial.

Skarzynski Black attorneys obtained two favorable rulings for their clients in an action for declaratory judgment and breach of contract, resulting in a final judgment and total victory. 

Skarzynski Black won summary judgment in favor of Scottsdale Indemnity Company. See, Strategic Forecasting, Inc. v. Scottsdale Indem. Co., No. 12CV5389JMAARL, 2015 WL 9694796 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2015). Strategic Forecasting involved a data breach class action filed against the Insured (“Stratfor”), an operator of a web-based purveyor of geo-political intelligence content and analysis. SB’s client, Scottsdale, issued a D&O Policy to Stratfor. Stratfor sought coverage for the class action; Scottsdale denied coverage arguing that the Scottsdale Policy’s broad-form professional services exclusion, which excluded coverage for all claims “arising out of” professional services, precluded coverage for the class action. Scottsdale maintained that the operation of a website was inherently a professional service, and claims arising out of the website’s negligent operation were therefore excluded from coverage.

Skarzynski Black successfully defeated an antitrust suit asserted against its client, a travel agency.  The plaintiff in the suit, also a travel agency, alleged that Skarzynski Black’s client interfered with the plaintiff’s relationship as a franchisee of American Express Travel and entered an improper agreement to control the market for discounted first and business class airline tickets. 

Skarzynski Black attorneys successfully obtained dismissal of an antitrust action alleging that the firm’s client had conspired with a unit of American Express to restrain trade in the sale of airline tickets. The March 16, 2015 ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres of the Southern District of New York, was a complete win for our client.