Overview
The attorneys of our Insurance Law Department are frequently called on to advise their insurance industry clients regarding potentially-fraudulent claims, and they regularly work with claims professionals and company Special Investigative Units to investigate and litigate suspected insurance fraud, including arson.
Because insurance fraud can occur in relation to all types of policies and at all stages of the claim, our attorneys bring their considerable knowledge of the insurance industry and the various types of policies to bear in advising and defending our clients. Our attorneys have experience taking examinations under oath to address suspected fraud and misrepresentation. The group’s attorneys have also litigated actions involving fraudulent claims, and have obtained favorable verdicts for clients in cases involving fraud and misrepresentations in the application for the policy; fraud in the presentation of property and bodily injury claims; fraudulent theft losses; and arson. The wealth of knowledge possessed by our attorneys is an asset to the Firm’s clients as they seek to prevent and address insurance fraud.
Representative Matters & Results
- Secured jury verdict in favor of insurer in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in suspected arson case, with the jury finding that the policy was void due to the insured’s material misrepresentations during the claims process.
- Secured jury verdict in favor of insurer in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in water damage property claim, with the jury finding that the insured’s son had intentionally misrepresented the cause of the loss in order to seek coverage under the policy.
- Successfully defended insurance company client in breach of contract and bad faith action arising from water loss claim, where the cause of the alleged loss was not covered and the insured made material misrepresentations on the application for the policy.
- Obtained federal jury verdict in favor of a large national insurance company client in fraudulent property loss claim involving the alleged theft of a race car.
- Secured judgment rescinding a disability insurance policy where it was proven that the insured made material misrepresentations in the application for the policy.
Attorneys
Steven Schildt
Principal & Co-Chair, Insurance Law Department
Member, Firm Board of Directors
Philadelphia
Phone: 215-587-1089
Mobile: 267-322-0388
Fax: 215-587-1444
Jeffrey M. Brenner
Principal
Insurance Law
Philadelphia
Phone: 215-587-1133
Mobile: (610) 334-4817
Fax: 215-587-1444
Anthony L. Miscioscia
Principal
Co-Chair, Insurance Law Department
Philadelphia
Phone: 215-587-1170
Fax: 215-587-1444
News & Insights
Steven Schildt
Principal & Co-Chair, Insurance Law Department
Member, Firm Board of Directors
Philadelphia
Phone: 215-587-1089
Mobile: 267-322-0388
Fax: 215-587-1444
Jeffrey M. Brenner
Principal
Insurance Law
Philadelphia
Phone: 215-587-1133
Mobile: (610) 334-4817
Fax: 215-587-1444
Anthony L. Miscioscia
Principal
Co-Chair, Insurance Law Department
Philadelphia
Phone: 215-587-1170
Fax: 215-587-1444
Representative Matters & Results
- Secured jury verdict in favor of insurer in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in suspected arson case, with the jury finding that the policy was void due to the insured’s material misrepresentations during the claims process.
- Secured jury verdict in favor of insurer in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in water damage property claim, with the jury finding that the insured’s son had intentionally misrepresented the cause of the loss in order to seek coverage under the policy.
- Successfully defended insurance company client in breach of contract and bad faith action arising from water loss claim, where the cause of the alleged loss was not covered and the insured made material misrepresentations on the application for the policy.
- Obtained federal jury verdict in favor of a large national insurance company client in fraudulent property loss claim involving the alleged theft of a race car.
- Secured judgment rescinding a disability insurance policy where it was proven that the insured made material misrepresentations in the application for the policy.