V&J Emp’t Serv., Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., 2021 WI App 27, 397 Wis. 2d 243, 959 N.W.2d 87 (unpublished, authored opinion) (successfully defended breach of contract and bad faith claims where insurer client declined to defend insured against multiple class actions alleging delivery drivers were under-reimbursed and tips withheld).
Blesener v. Linton, 2018 WI App 21, 380 Wis. 2d 508, 913 N.W.2d 514 (obtained summary judgment ruling, upheld on appeal, that homeowners policy did not coverage alleged misrepresentations in sale of real estate)
Marks v. Houston Cas. Co., 2016 WI 53, 369 Wis. 2d 547, 881 N.W.2d 309 (represented amici curiae in case holding that an insurer that unilaterally disclaims coverage is not estopped from relying on policy exclusions if subsequently sued for breach of a duty to defend and overruling prior case law that suggested otherwise)
Schinner v. Gundrum, 2013 WI 71, 349 Wis. 2d 529, 833 N.W.2d 685 (represented amicus curiae in case establishing insured’s hosting of underaged drinking party was not an “occurrence” for purposes of liability coverage)
S.V. v. Kratz, E.D. Wisconsin, Case No. 10-C-919 (J. Griesbach) (obtained summary judgment declaring that homeowners and umbrella policy excluded coverage for equal protection claims arising out of insured district attorney’s sexual harassment of domestic violence victim)
Lisowski v. Hastings Mut. Ins. Co., 2009 WI 11, 315 Wis. 2d 388, 759 N.W.2d 754 (represented amicus curiae in case holding that business liability policy’s “for a covered auto” language was permissible under Wisconsin’s omnibus statute and precluded UIM coverage for insured’s son’s injuries arising out of use of a non-covered auto)
Dairyland Power Coop. v. Merrill Iron & Steel, Inc., La Crosse Co. Case No. 09-CV-1030 (secured summary judgment determination that liability policies excluded coverage claims arising out of insured’s allegedly faulty component parts)
Employers Ins. Co. of Wausau v. Century Indem. Co., 443 V.3d 573 (7th Cir. 2006) (represented insurer in case of first impression addressing whether courts or arbitrators should decide whether consolidated arbitration is appropriate)