Stephen E. Goldman

Managing Partner

  • Overview

    Biography

    Steve Goldman is the managing partner of the firm and a nationally recognized trial lawyer with over 35 years of experience litigating and trying a diverse range of cases throughout the United States. During that time, Mr. Goldman has served as counsel for insurers in many of the country's most significant property insurance and class action cases, including The Standard Fire Insurance Company v. Knowles (Supreme Court of United States holding that plaintiff's stipulation cannot defeat federal jurisdiction under Class Action Fairness Act); Travco v. Ward (Virginia Supreme Court upheld trial court's judgment that property insurance policies do not cover losses caused by presence of Chinese drywall); Sher v. Lafayette Insurance Company (upholding the flood exclusion in Louisiana following Hurricane Katrina); Landry v. Louisiana Citizens Insurance Company (holding Louisiana's Valued Policy Law inapplicable to certain Katrina-related claims); and Streamline Capital v. Hartford Insurance (refusing to adopt the time necessary to rebuild the World Trade Center as the "period of restoration" for WTC tenants). As an advocate and advisor for international and domestic insurance carriers and insurance industry organizations, he has handled numerous high-impact cases arising from catastrophes such as Superstorm Sandy, Hurricanes Katrina and Andrew, the terrorist attacks of 9/11, and the anthrax scare in 2001. Mr. Goldman has appeared as counsel in trial and appellate courts in 28 states and has aggressively litigated and, in many instances, tried high-exposure cases throughout the Northeast and in jurisdictions as diverse as Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Iowa. He also has significant experience litigating class actions, especially those based on insurance coverage issues and insurer market conduct.

    Mr. Goldman is a prolific speaker on insurance coverage, litigation, and ethics matters and has published numerous papers on these subjects. In addition, he contributes to the firm's Property Insurance Coverage Insights blog. Mr. Goldman has been listed in The Best Lawyers in America© in the area of Insurance Law since 2006. Mr. Goldman has also been selected to the Connecticut Super Lawyers list since 2006 and the Top 50 Connecticut Super Lawyers for 2009.

  • Experience
    • Experience

      Experience

      • Knowles v. Standard Fire Insurance Company 133 S. Ct. 1345 (Supreme Court of the United States, 2013)— This appeal was heard by the Supreme Court of the United States and resulted in a 9-0 opinion in favor of our client. Our petition for certiorari was granted by the Supreme Court after the Eighth Circuit had declined to hear a discretionary appeal and after the Supreme Court had denied a petition for certiorari on the same issue the year before. This is the first case in which the Supreme Court granted review under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005. The issue on appeal was whether a named plaintiff in a putative class action can defeat federal jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 by stipulating to limit damages to $5 million or less even if the amount potentially recoverable by the putative class would exceed the federal jurisdictional amount in the absence of the stipulation. The Supreme Court accepted our argument that the federal court jurisdiction could not be defeated by such a stipulation. The underlying case involved the alleged failure to pay the general contractor overhead and profit as part of the settlement of property insurance claims and was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff after the case was remanded to the federal district court.

      • Significant Reported Decisions

      • Travco v. Ward 468 Fed. Appx. 195 (4th Cir. 2012) and 284 Va. 547 (Va., 2012) – This was the nation's leading case on the question of whether coverage existed under property insurance policies for losses caused by the presence of Chinese Drywall. We brought this declaratory judgment action on behalf of the insurer, which was a Travelers subsidiary. We successfully obtained summary judgment from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. On appeal, after briefing and argument, the US Fourth Circuit certified most of the coverage issues to the Virginia Supreme Court. The Virginia Supreme Court then affirmed the rulings of the federal district court, and the US Fourth Circuit subsequently affirmed the judgment in its entirety. Steve Goldman argued the motion for summary judgment before the district court and the appeals in both the US Fourth Circuit and the Virginia Supreme Court.

      • Allen v. USAA 790 F.3d 1274 (11th Cir. Fla., 2015) – In this putative class action, the plaintiff alleged that our client violated the Florida statutes regarding mandatory code upgrade coverage. Steve Goldman obtained summary judgment for our client in the federal district court for the Northern District of Florida and successfully argued the appeal before the Eleventh Circuit, which affirmed the judgment in favor of our client.

      • Thatcher v. Hanover Insurance Company 659 F.3d 1212 (8th Cir. 2011) – This appeal also arose out of a putative class action alleging a failure to pay general contractor overhead and profit as a part of the settlement of property insurance claims. After we removed the action (originally brought in Circuit Court of Miller County, Arkansas, a notorious "magnet" jurisdiction) to the federal court, the plaintiff moved to voluntarily dismiss the case without prejudice so that he could file a more "streamlined" complaint in the state court that would defeat federal jurisdiction. After the federal district court judge granted the plaintiff's motion, we appealed, arguing that a Rule 41 dismissal cannot be used as a forum shopping vehicle. The Eighth Circuit agreed, and reversed the district court, reinstituting federal jurisdiction. Steve Goldman argued the appeal before the Eighth Circuit.

      • Moore v. Travelers 312 Fed. Appx. 911 (11th Cir. 2009) – This appeal also arose out of a putative class action alleging a failure to pay general contractor overhead and profit as a part of the settlement of property insurance claims. Here, our client demanded appraisal of the named plaintiff's claim after the action had been commenced in the US District Court for Georgia. We moved to dismiss on the grounds that the plaintiff had not complied with the conditions precedent in the policy before commencing suit. The District Court granted our motion. On appeal, the 11th Circuit affirmed.

      • Globecon v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company 434 F.3d 165, 176 (2d Cir. 2006) – This appeal arose out of a business interruption claim arising out of the 9/11 catastrophe in New York. The insured under The Hartford's policy attempted to assign their rights after the loss to an entity that purchased the insured's assets. The Second Circuit found that the purchasing entity could only pursue a claim if they could show substantial compliance with the policy conditions and, even then, they could not pursue any claims for their own loss of business income subsequent to the date of the assignment. Similarly, the Second Circuit found that the purchaser's claim for consequential damages could not be pursued.

      • Crowley v. Travelers 919 A.2d 979 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2007) - Steve Goldman argued this appeal, in which the Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed a decision (actually revoked its early grant of certiorari as "improvidently granted") denying class certification in a statewide overhead and profit class action.

      • Lindas v. First Floridian 114 So. 3d 1018 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) – This was another overhead and profit class action. After a three day class certification hearing, the plaintiff's motion for class certification was denied. On appeal, the Florida Court of Appeal affirmed without oral argument.

      • Sher v. Lafayette Insurance Company 973 So. 2d 39 (La.App. 4 Cir., 2007) aff'd 952 So. 2d 683 (La., Mar. 13, 2007) (Louisiana Court of Appeals and Louisiana Supreme Court) – This case was critically important to the insurance industry, as it established that the flood insurance exclusion in property insurance policies applied to the flooding that took place in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina.
      • In re Katrina Canal Breaches Litigation 524 F.3d 700 (5th Cir. 2008) – This case was the federal court predecessor to the Sher case, and the opinion of the US 5th Circuit was critically important to the Louisiana Supreme Court when it took up the appeal in Sher. Following the District Court's decision finding the flood exclusion ambiguous and unenforceable, the 5th Circuit reversed and found the exclusion unambiguous and enforceable.

      • Corban v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 20 So. 3d 601, 609 (Miss. 2009) – Steve was an author of the amicus brief on behalf of the American Insurance Association. The Mississippi Supreme Court properly concluded that the flood exclusion applied to the storm surge following Hurricane Katrina and that the anti-concurrent causation provision in the policy applied to simultaneous indistinguishable damage (i.e., where both forces acted concurrently and it was impossible to determine whether damage was caused by wind or flood).

      • Landry v. Louisiana Citizens Insurance Company 983 So. 2d 66 (La. 5/21/08) aff'd 964 So. 2d 463. (La. App. 3 Cir. 8/28/07 (Louisiana Court of Appeal and Louisiana Supreme Court) – This case involved the question of whether Louisiana's Valued Policy Law applied to losses where buildings suffered total losses but most of the damage was caused by an excluded peril (i.e., flood) and a small part of the damage was caused by a covered peril (i.e., wind). The court found that the Valued Policy Law did not apply to the case at hand, but its decision was drafted relatively narrowly, so many of the issues involved remained outstanding. The 5th Circuit's decision in Chauvin, therefore, remains the most comprehensive decision on this issue. Steve Goldman was an author of the amicus brief for the American Insurance Association. He also prepared the Louisiana lawyer who argued the case in the Louisiana Court of Appeal and Louisiana Supreme Court.
      • Chauvin v. State Farm et al 495 F.3d 232 (5th Cir. 2007) – This was the federal court counterpart to Landry. Both the district court and the 5th Circuit found that Louisiana's Valued Policy Law did not apply to losses in which most of the damage was caused by an excluded peril.

      • State of Louisiana v. AAA Insurance et al. ("Road Home") 2011 WL 5118859 (E.D.La.10/28/2011) – This case involved a subrogation/recovery action brought by the State of Louisiana seeking to recover from all risk property insurers funds that had been paid out under the Road Home program that Congress authorized following Hurricane Katrina. There was a challenge to federal jurisdiction over the appeal early in the litigation. The Louisiana Supreme Court ultimately agreed with our position that anti-assignment clauses were enforceable, but only enforced the clauses with respect to a small number of carriers whose policy language was sufficiently specific in the court's view.
      • Garson Management v. Travelers No. 4169/99 (NY Sup. Ct 2000) aff'd Garson Mgt. Co. v. Travelers Indem. Co. of Ill., 300 A.D.2d 538, 539, 752 N.Y.S.2d 696 (New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division – 1st Department, 2002) – This case involved the question of coverage for structural damage to an apartment complex in Yonkers, New York. Steve Goldman obtained summary judgment for the insurer and successfully defended the appeal. I argued both the summary judgment motion and the appeal.

      • Rego v. Connecticut Insurance Placement Facility 22 Conn.App. 428, 430, 577 A.2d 1105 (1990), rev'd on other grounds, 219 Conn. 339, 593 A.2d 491 (1991) (Connecticut Supreme Court and Connecticut Appellate Court) – This appeal involved the question of the burden of proof regarding the Misrepresentation/Fraud condition in property insurance policies. The issue was whether the insurer's burden of proof could be met by a preponderance of the evidence, or whether the insurer could only meet its burden of proof with clear, convincing and unequivocal evidence. The Connecticut Supreme Court upheld the preponderance standard. Steve Goldman argued the appeal and received the David Neiditz Award from the University of Connecticut for the year's best appellate brief in the State.

      • Chapman v. Norfolk & Dedham Mutual Fire Insurance Company 39 Conn. App. 306, 665 A.2d 112 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1995) – This appeal arose out of the trial of an arson case in which the insurer was allowed to introduce otherwise hearsay evidence in order to defend itself against allegations of bad faith and violations of Connecticut's Unfair Trade Practices Act. The argument for the admissibility of the evidence was that it was information that the insurer's decision-maker had at the time the decision to deny was made, and that the insurer had a right to put that information before the jury. The Appellate Court affirmed the trial court's ruling allowing the evidence to be admitted. Steve Goldman tried the case, wrote the appellate brief and argued the appeal.

      • MBS Management Services, Inc. v. Homeland Insurance Company In re MBS Mgmt. Services, Inc., 690 F.3d 352, 356 (5th Cir.2012) – This was a business interruption case that arose out of losses caused by Hurricane Katrina. After several years of litigation, on the eve of trial, we obtained rulings from the federal district court that the plaintiff could only recover for losses that were caused by the interruption of the insured's business, and could not recover for losses caused by the interruption of the insured's affiliate, which was not insured under the policy. The plaintiff came to the conclusion that this ruling would be fatal to its case, and voluntarily dismissed the case so that it could pursue an appeal before the 5th Circuit. On appeal, the 5th Circuit affirmed the trial court, resulting in our client's escaping any liability. Steve Goldman was lead trial counsel in the trial court and argued the appeal before the Fifth Circuit.

      • Grantham Education v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company 56 Sc 3d 462 (La.App. 1 Cir., Oct. 29, 2010) – This was a business interruption case arising out of Hurricane Katrina. We obtained partial summary judgment on behalf of the insurer based on a finding that the civil authority coverage was subject to the policy limit for business interruption. The insured appealed, and the Louisiana Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling. Steve Goldman argued the summary judgment motion and the appeal for the insurer.

      • Lead Counsel for several insurers in defense of numerous large lawsuits arising out of claims for business losses resulting from events of September 11.  The largest claims were in excess of $100 million, and most were in excess of $10 million. Litigation spawned many of the country's most frequently cited judicial decisions in business interruption, including Streamline Capital, L.L.C. v. Hartford Casualty Ins. Co., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 468 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 7, 2005) and Lava Trading, Inc. v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 466 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 10, 2005).

      • Paradies Shops, Inc. v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co., 2004 WL 5704715 (N.D. Ga. Dec.15, 2004) - Obtained summary judgment from federal court in Atlanta in defense of civil authority claim prosecuted by owner of airport stores throughout the United States.

      • Wells Dairy v. Travelers 241 F.Supp.2d 945, 966 (N.D.Iowa 2003) - Defended insurer in $30 million bad faith and breach of contract action arising from the denial of a national ice cream producer's extra expense claim.

      • Lisa Bruno v. The Travelers Companies et al. 172 Conn App 717 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2017) Represented defendant insurer in case involving allegations by a former insured in connection with the insurer’s denial of coverage for a fire loss and the insurer’s subsequent testimony at the insured’s divorce proceedings concerning the basis for the denial. On appeal, the Court held that the insurer’s testimony and conduct at the hearing was protected by the absolute immunity afforded witnesses in judicial proceedings. Thus, the plaintiff’s defamation and related claims arising out of that conduct and testimony were barred.

      • Shri Gayatri LLC v. The Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company 206 F. Supp 3d 684 (US District Court, Mass., 2016) Successfully obtained summary judgment on behalf of an insurance company client in federal court, defeating plaintiff’s allegations of breach of good faith. The owner of a hotel had sought to recover for the total loss of the business due to a 2011 tornado in Massachusetts followed by rain and ice storms later that year. The court agreed with the insurer that the insured’s failure to repair or replace the property within two years of the date of loss, as required by the insurance contract, meant there was no coverage for replacement cost, rejecting the insureds’ argument that delays in claim resolution were the carrier's fault, and should extend the two-year period.

      • Other Significant Matters

      • ManorCare of New Jersey v. Travelers 210 F.3d 358 (US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit) – This case also involved the question of coverage for losses relating to defective roofing materials. We obtained summary judgment from the federal District Court, and that judgment was affirmed by the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

      • Travelers v. American Media (S.D. of Fla.)  Advised and represented Travelers in declaratory judgment action arising out of anthrax contamination of the headquarters of the National Enquirer. The building had been contaminated by an letter containing anthrax addressed to the photo editor, causing his death and the evacuation of the structure. The case turned on whether the vandalism exception to the contamination exclusions applied. After the declaratory judgment clarified the dispute, the matter was settled on favorable terms.

      • Related Companies v. Travelers (New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division – 2nd Department) – This appeal arose out of a claim for termite damage to a condominium complex in Jacksonville, Florida. We brought a declaratory judgment action in the New York state courts and obtained summary judgment. We then successfully defended the appeal. Steve Goldman argued both the summary judgment motion and the appeal.

      • ManorCare of Kansas v. Travelers No. 81006 (Kan. App. 1999) – This case involved the issue of coverage for losses relating to defective roofing materials. Steve Goldman obtained summary judgment for the insurer in the trial court and the judgment was affirmed by the Kansas Court of Appeals. Steve argued the motion for summary judgment before the trial court and the appeal before the Kansas Court of Appeals.

      • Poretsky v. HiRise Engineering, 2016 WL 5678380, (US District Court, ED New York, 2016) Represented insurance company in obtaining dismissal of RICO claims alleging improper conduct in adjustment and settlement of flood insurance claims under federal flood insurance policies. 

      • Lead trial counsel in defense of $100 million Hurricane Katrina commercial property case. First Hurricane Katrina case the client insurance company allowed before a New Orleans jury. Tried to successful verdict and settled on appeal for less than 2% of the claim.
      • Impac Hotel v. Travelers (N.D.Ga.) - Obtained Summary Judgment from federal court for Insurer on "Loss in Progress" defense to claim arising out of damage to hotel in Eastern Kentucky built on top of mine spoil.
      • Successfully represented property insurer in trial of coverage and bad faith dispute involving claims for more than $30 million in damage for mold and other contamination of apartment complex. Case was tried before a federal court jury in Oklahoma City. After a week of trial, the case settled for considerably less than had been offered before trial commenced.
      • Defense of insurer in arbitration and state court proceedings in Florida in $300 million property damage, business interruption, and consequential damage claim brought by owners of Miami Beach resort because of Hurricane Andrew. After 23 days of evidentiary hearings, case was resolved on very favorable terms (less than was offered before arbitration commenced).
      • Represented insurer in coverage litigation concerning Big Dig builder’s risk policy. Litigation involved three claims for which construction company sought coverage for the costs associated with the infiltration of water into an underwater tunnel crossing the Fort Point Channel in Boston.
      • Represented property insurer in Florida and Louisiana litigation arising out of $19 million contractor kickback scheme arising out claims by owners of subsidized housing for damage caused by Hurricane Andrew. Cases were resolved with our client avoiding payment to insured and recovering money from broker and public adjuster.
      • Represented property insurer in connection with a claim in excess of $20 million resulting from a catastrophic loss at a regional composting facility in Hartford, Connecticut.
      • Represented property insurers regarding coverage and claim analysis for property insurance claims for damage relating to presence of mold in a public school building.
      • Defended insurer in a case brought in the Central District of California in which the plaintiff sought to bring a class action involving two classes of allegedly aggrieved policyholders. The first class was allegedly deprived of payment of general contractor overhead and profit as a part of its damages. The second class was allegedly deprived of payment of sales tax as a part of its damages. After extensive discovery and motion practice, the class action allegations were voluntarily dismissed and the case was resolved on favorable terms.

      • Representation of insurers in complex insurance dispute in federal court, Eastern District of Louisiana, involving Hurricane Katrina property damage and business interruption claim for over $27 million and bad faith claims of over $100 million, where bad faith claims were dismissed based on summary judgment briefing and expert was precluded from testifying as to damages included in initial report based on motion in limine. The plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case for the purpose of taking an appeal, and the district court's rulings were affirmed on appeal.

      • back to top
    • Professional Associations

      Professional Associations

      American College of Trial Lawyers
      Fellow
      Chair, Connecticut State Committee (2014 - 2016)
      Member, Federal Civil Procedure Committee (2015 - present)

      Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel
      Foundation Board of Directors (2015 - present)
      Admissions Committee (2001 - 2007)
      Board of Directors (2002 - 2009)
      Chair of Class Action Section
      Chair of Ethics and Professionalism Section (2001 - 2002)
      Chair of Property Insurance Section (1998 - 2001)
      Executive Committee (2007 - 2009)
      Vice President (2002 - 2005)

      International Association of Defense Counsel
      Property Insurance Committee

      American Bar Association
      Tort Trial and Insurance Practice Section; Past Chair of Property Insurance Law Committee

      American College of Coverage and Extracontractual Counsel
      Fellow

      American Bar Foundation
      Fellow

      Connecticut Bar Foundation
      James W. Cooper Fellow

      Loss Executives Association

      Connecticut Defense Lawyers Association

      National Center for State Courts
      Lawyers Committee
    • Honors + Awards

      Honors + Awards

      Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© as Hartford Lawyer of the Year in the area of Insurance Law for 2011, 2016, and 2018

      Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© in the area of Insurance Law since 2006

      Selected to the Connecticut Super Lawyers list from 2006 to 2017.

      Selected to the Top 50 Connecticut Super Lawyers list in 2009.

      Hartford County Bar Association, Public Service Award, 2002

      Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel, John Alan Appleman Award, 2001

      Best Appellate Brief in Connecticut, awarded by University of Connecticut, 1992

    • Community Involvement

      Community Involvement

      University of Connecticut School of Law LL.M. Program
      served as Adjunct Professor, teaching course in property insurance law

      Western New England College
      served as Adjunct Professor, teaching course in trial practice

      Greater Hartford Legal Aid
      Board of Directors (1997 - 2002)

      Greater Hartford Legal Aid Foundation
      Board of Directors (2002 - present)

      The Village for Families & Children
      Board of Directors (2016 - present)
  • NEWS + PRESS
    • Publications

      Publications

      "Property Insurers' Rights and Obligations Under Policy Provisions that Provide Coverage of Personal Property on Others," published in Tort and Insurance Law Journal (Spring 1997)

      "Coverage Under Property Insurance Policies for Personal Property of Others," published in Tort and Insurance Law Journal, also presented to the Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel (1997)

      "The Standard Mortgage Clause in Property Insurance Policies," published in Tort and Insurance Law Journal (1997)

      "Recent Developments in Property Insurance Law," published in Tort and Insurance Law Journal (Winter 1996)

      "First Party Pollution: Asbestos Coverage Issues," published in ABA Property Insurance Committee (1996)

      "Property Insurance Update," published in Federation of Insurance and Corporate Counsel Update (7/1995)

      "Property Insurance Law: 1991-1992 Developments," published in Tort and Insurance Law Journal (Winter 1992)

      "Protection of Insurance Company and Lawyer's Files, What Investigation Information if any, from both Good Faith and Strategy Standpoints Should be Shared with the Claimant Insured," published in Defense Research Institute (10/1991)

      "Asbestos Coverage Under Property Insurance Policies," published in Defense Research Institute (5/1991)

      "Conflicts Creating Ethical Dilemas for the Property Insurance Attorney," published in ABA Property Insurance Committee, Tort and Insurance Practice Section (3/1990)

      "Reservation of Rights Letters," published in Defense Research Institute (1988)

      "The Broker, The Agent and Good Faith - Caught in the Middle," published in ABA Property Insurance Committee, TIPS National Institute (3/1987)

      "The Standard Mortgage Clause - Protecting All Parties," published in American Bar Association Monograph (1987)

    • Presentations

      Presentations

      "Strategies for Dealing with Difficult Opposing Counsel in Complex Litigation," at Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel's Annual Meeting, Hot Springs, Virginia (8/2009)

      "Layered and Quota-Share Property Insurance Claims and Litigation," at Property Loss Research Bureau (PLRB) annual Claims Conference in Seattle, Washington (March 2009)

      "Roundtable - Coverage and Litigation Issues Arising Out of the 2004 and 2005 Hurricanes," at Annual Spring CLE Meeting of the Property Insurance Law Committee of the Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Section of the American Bar Association (Spring 2006)

      "Property Insurance and Business Interruption Issues Arising Out of Catastrophes," at European Meeting of Excess/Surplus Lines Claims Association, Zurich, Switzerland (11/2005)

      "The Different Types of Business Interruption Coverage," at Property Loss Research Bureau (4/2005)

      "The Different Types of Business Interruption Coverage," at Defense Research Institute (4/2005)

      "Period of Restoration," at joint meeting of Property Loss Research Bureau and Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel (9/2004)

      "Business Interruption Coverage: What is Interruption, Extra Expense, How Do Policy Forms Differ?" at Property Loss Research Bureau (3/2004)

      "Appraisal in Large Losses--What Are the Unique Aspects?" at Loss Executives Association (2004)

      "The Direct Physical Loss Requirement: Does It Still Exist?" at New England Claim Executives Association (3/11/2003)
      • » more info

      "The Direct Physical Loss Requirement: Does It Still Exist?" at Loss Executives Association (2003)

      "Different Types of Business Interruption Coverage," at Property Loss Research Bureau (2003)

      "Re-Examining Liability in the Face of Terrorism: Property Insurance," at Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel 2002 Risk Analysis Symposium (5/2002)

      "Bio-Terrorism Coverage Issues," at Property Loss Research Bureau Symposium, Impact of Terrorism on Claims (1/31/2002)

      "Coverage Under Property Insurance Policies for Loss of Data and Loss of Software," at Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel and Underwriters at Lloyds, Lloyds Library (7/2001)

      "Appraisal Provisions in Property Insurance Policies," at Property Loss Research Bureau Symposium (2001, 2002)

      "Waivers of Subrogation in the AIA Contract," at Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel workshop (2/2000)

      "Work Product and Attorney Client Privilege Issues Arising Out of Property Insurance Claims," presented at Mealey's (1999) and the Defense Research Institute (1988)

      "Coverage for Collapse Under Property Insurance Policies," at Defense Research Institute (1999)

      "Coverage for Asbestos Removal Under Property Insurance Policies," at Property Insurance Committee of Tort & Insurance Practice Section of American Bar Association (1998)

      "Conflicts Between Primary and Excess Property Insurers and Their Reinsurers Arising out of Catastrophe Losses," at the Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel (1997)

      "The Impact of NFPA 921 on the Subrogating Property Insurer," at the Property Insurance Committee of Tort & Insurance Practice Section of American Bar Association (1997)

      "Business Interruption Coverages," presented at a PLRB workshop (1991)

      "Actual Cash Value and the Broad Evidence Rule," presented at a PLRB workshop (1990)

      "Subrogation Against an Entity Insured by the Subrogating Insurer," at the American Bar Association Annual Meeting (1987)

    • News

      R+C in the News

      • November 21, 2017

        Robinson+Cole Lawyers Participate at HarrisMartin's Hurricanes Irma & Maria Conference

        • » more info
      • November 1, 2016

        Robinson+Cole's Environmental + Utilities Group Holds Annual Summit

        • » more info
      • June 6, 2016

        Robinson+Cole Sponsors George W. Crawford Black Bar Association's 2016 Annual Dinner

      • February 25, 2016

        Media Outlet Covers Firm’s Pick of Stephen Goldman as Managing Partner

        • » more info
      • March 21, 2013

        U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Standard Fire Insurance Company v. Knowles, A Class Action Fairness Act Case

        • » more info
      • May 31, 2011

        Insurance Attorney Leads Pro Bono Session for Legal Aid Lawyers

        • » more info
      • March 30, 2009

        Robinson & Cole Partners Speak at Annual PLRB Claims Conference

        • » more info
      • October 30, 2008

        Robinson & Cole Insurance Attorneys Speak at PLRB/FDCC Seminar

        • » more info
      • April 10, 2008

        Robinson & Cole Partner Admitted to American College of Trial Lawyers

        • » more info
      • June 15, 2001

        Hartford partner receives 2001 John Alan Appleman Award

        • » more info

      R+C News Releases

      • October 17, 2017

        Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized by Super Lawyers®

        • » more info
        • View article
      • August 15, 2017

        Fifty-Nine Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2018

        • » more info
        • View article
      • December 9, 2016

        Steve Goldman Elected to The Village Board of Directors

        • » more info
        • View article
      • October 18, 2016

        Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized by Super Lawyers®

        • » more info
        • View article
      • August 15, 2016

        Robinson+Cole Receives Top Listing in Connecticut Lawyer Count in The Best Lawyers in America® 2017

        • » more info
        • View article
      • February 19, 2016

        Stephen E. Goldman Elected Robinson+Cole Managing Partner

        • » more info
        • View article
      • October 19, 2015

        Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized by Super Lawyers®

        • » more info
        • View article
      • August 18, 2015

        Robinson+Cole Receives Top Listing in Connecticut Lawyer Count in The Best Lawyers in America® 2016

        • » more info
        • View article
      • December 17, 2014

        Greater Hartford Legal Aid Foundation Recognizes Robinson+Cole for a Century of Support

        • » more info
        • View article
      • October 17, 2014

        Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized by Super Lawyers

        • » more info
        • View article
      • August 19, 2014

        Robinson+Cole Receives Top Listing in Connecticut Lawyer Count in Best Lawyers National Peer Review Survey

        • » more info
        • View article
      • August 16, 2013

        Robinson & Cole Receives Top Listing in Connecticut Attorney Count in Best Lawyers National Peer Review Survey

        • » more info
        • View article
      • October 22, 2012

        Super Lawyers® Names 49 Robinson & Cole Attorneys to 2012 List and Recognizes 26 as Rising Stars

        • » more info
        • View article
      • August 28, 2012

        Robinson & Cole Receives Top Listing in Connecticut Attorney Count in Best Lawyers National Peer Review Survey

        • » more info
        • View article
      • September 12, 2011

        Robinson & Cole Receives Top Listing in Connecticut Attorney Count in Best Lawyers National Peer Review Survey

        • » more info
        • View article
      • November 10, 2010

        Best Lawyers Names Five Robinson & Cole Attorneys as Lawyers of the Year, Most Chosen in the Hartford Community

        • » more info
        • View article