"> Insurance Law | Representing Insurers in a Wide Variety of Matters | Fineman Krekstein & Harris P.C.

Insurance Defense Litigation

Attorney Lead for Practice Group

Fineman Krekstein & Harris’s insurance practice involves representing insurers in a wide variety of matters.  The firm understands the need for insurers to receive a prompt and efficient risk management assessment, which forms the foundation of the strong relationship we have developed with the insurers that we represent.

Whether the matter is simple or complex, we strive to provide the carriers with thorough analysis to enable a quick resolution or adequate time to prepare a case for trial.

Over the years we have represented carriers in the following specialized areas:

  • Agents and Brokers
  • Business Disparagement
  • Business Torts
  • Commercial Vehicles
  • Construction
  • Dram Shop
  • Employment
  • Errors and Omissions
  • Fraud
  • Garage Keeper’s Liability
  • Life, Health and Disability
  • Premises Liability
  • Products Liability
  • Professional Liability
  • Property Damage
  • Regulatory Affairs

Representative Matters

  • Won summary judgment on behalf of a car rental company in a personal injury action where the plaintiff alleged that he was struck by a vehicle owned by car rental company while crossing the street.  Plaintiff claimed the vehicle fled the scene following the accident.  The defense successfully argued that Plaintiff failed to produce sufficient evidence to show that the vehicle involved in the accident was owned by the car rental company since Plaintiff was not able to recall the license plate number nor any other identifying information. In addition, the defense provided information to show that the rental car alleged to have been involved in the accident had been returned to the rental car company thirty minutes prior to the accident.
  • Represented a store owner in a personal injury case in which plaintiff alleged that she was struck in the head by an overhead metal gate as she attempted to leave the store.  Investigation revealed several inconsistencies regarding Plaintiff’s explanation of how the accident occurred.  The defense successfully argued that it was impossible for the metal gate to move on its own and a defense award was issued at a court mandated non-binding arbitration.  Plaintiff did not appeal the arbitration award.
  • Represented the lessor of an electric burden carrier cart in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas.  The burden carrier cart struck a union worker who alleged that the cart was negligently maintained and that he suffered permanent and debilitating injuries as a result of the accident.  Utilizing a variety of liability and damages experts, the firm successfully reduced exposure and obtained a settlement well below plaintiff’s original $5 million demand.
  • Represented the manufacturer of an industrial disposable wiping material machine in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas.  Plaintiff alleged, in part, that he sustained severe burns and injuries across his body as a result of the machine’s defective design.  The firm was able to reduce potential exposure by demonstrating culpable conduct via a defendant and obtained a favorable settlement.
  • Obtained summary judgment on behalf of a leasing company sued as a result of a multiple fatality motor vehicle accident.  Plaintiffs alleged that the leasing company’s failure to maintain its own insurance policy on the vehicle made it responsible under a state statute requiring such companies to have insurance to pay for the damages caused by the driver of the vehicle.  The court agreed with the leasing company and ruled that noncompliance with the statute did not create a private right of action by the Plaintiffs.