News and Articles
INSURER'S "HISTORICAL PRACTICE" HELD TO BE BAD FAITH
Claims against employers have become more commonplace. In response, insurance carriers have expanded their offerings of Employment Practice Liability Insurance ("EPLI"). EPLI is a relatively recent form of liability insurance which provides protection for employers against claims made by employees related to wrongful employment practices. Generally, EPLI coverage limits range from $1 million to $25 million and most policies include coverage for legal defense within the aggregate insurance limits, along with covering costs for adverse judgments and/or settlements. EPLI coverage varies based on the type, size, and risk profile of a business. Although EPLI coverage differs substantially between policies, it commonly covers claims related to discrimination (race, age, sex, disability, etc.), sexual harassment, wrongful termination or discipline, breach of employment contract, emotional distress, invasion of privacy, libel or slander, and employee benefits mismanagement.
Knowing the coverage scope of an EPLI policy is particularly important when an employer faces claims brought by a class of employees. A class action based on violations of law for minimum wages, holiday pay, or deprivation of meal and rest breaks, for instance, can force an employer to expend significant time and expense in litigation. Often numerous claims are included in the same complaint requesting retroactive payment and injunctive relief for the employer to change its practices. However, although these claims can often seem integrally related in a complaint, the coverage under an EPLI policy for each specific claim can be drastically different. Indeed, an insurance carrier that treated a meal and rest break claim as a wage and hour law violation under its EPLI policy was recently ruled as a matter of law to have acted in bad faith for doing so. Continue Reading
CLIENT AWARDED JUDGMENT OF $1.18 MILLION ON SECURITIES CLAIM
A King County Superior Court judge recently entered a judgment in favor of our client for $1,181,059 in a case concerning Rule 144 stock. The court found that the defendants had wrongly delayed the client from selling his restricted securities before the stock price declined. Al Van Kampen and Nathan Paine handled the case.
AIRCRAFT CASE RESULTS IN JUDGMENT FOR $6.076 MILLION
The firm's client was granted a judgment totaling $6,076,025 from the Seattle federal district court in a breach of contract case concerning two aircraft owned by foreign companies. The judgment also dismissed a multimillion dollar counterclaim filed by one of the foreign companies. The court judgment was entered after 2½ years of litigation and arbitration proceedings. An arbitration panel previously ruled in favor of our client after a 6-day evidentiary hearing. Following judgment, our firm was able to collect the entire judgment, plus attorney fees and interest through execution proceedings. Al Van Kampen represented the firm's client.
ROHDE & VAN KAMPEN SELECTED AS A "GO-TO" LAW FIRM
Corporate Counsel magazine announced that Rohde & Van Kampen was selected as a "Go-To" law firm based on a survey of the Fortune 500 companies. Corporate Counsel magazine researched seven legal practice areas, including Litigation, Intellectual Property and Securities. According to the magazine, less than one-half of one percent of the top law firms in the U.S. and abroad were designated as "Go-To" law firms. "We are very pleased to have achieved this designation, which we believe reflects our success in achieving great results for our clients," stated Rohde & Van Kampen member Al Van Kampen. "This award shows that a small law firm can have very significant roles in representing the largest business clients."