Roberts Levin Rosenberg Attorneys Blog

Roberts Levin Rosenberg Lawyers Selected to The Best Lawyers In America's 2011 List

2010-08-20T11:08:00.003-06:00

Thomas L. Roberts, Bradley A. Levin, Michael J. Rosenberg and Ross B.H. Buchanan have been selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers In America® 2011 list.

Roberts and Levin have been listed in three categories, appellate law, insurance law and personal injury litigation. Less than 10 percent of those listed are named in three or more categories. Click here to read more.

2010-07-01T14:36:00.001-06:00

Bradley Levin, a shareholder in the Denver-based law firm ROBERTS LEVIN ROSENBERG has been listed in the July/August issue of Super Lawyers, Corporate Counsel Edition for his insurance coverage work.

For the past 30 years, Levin’s practice has focused primarily on insurance bad faith, and coverage matters as trial and appellate counsel or expert consultant. His practice also includes other tort and commercial dispute litigation. He lectures frequently on insurance coverage and bad faith law. Levin belongs to the Colorado Association of Trial Lawyers and the American Trial Lawyers Association. He also serves on the Colorado Supreme Court Committee on Civil Jury Instructions. He is listed in The Best Lawyers in America® and has been honored by the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association for the many amicus briefs he has written and for his work in insurance law.

Each issue of Super Lawyers Corporate Counsel Edition lists attorneys selected for inclusion in Super Lawyers in business-related practice areas. This magazine is distributed to more than 20,000 Corporate Counsel and 5,000 CEOs of the top private and publicly held companies in the country.

Erie Prediction:

2010-03-15T12:44:00.003-06:00

The Tenth Circuit recently held that the Colorado Supreme Court would not allow application of the “four corners” rule in a manner inconsistent with its purpose and reversed judgment in favor of an insurer that refused to defend multiple lawsuits by analyzing each complaint separately and ignoring facts extrinsic to the complaint: Apartment Inv. & Mgmt. Co. (AIMCO) v. Nutmeg Ins. Co., 593 F.3d 1188 (10th Cir. 2010).

Thomas L. Roberts and Bradley A. Levin were on the winning appellate team.

Colorado Jury Returns $37.3 Million Verdict Against Assurant Health in Rescission Case

2010-02-09T15:18:00.002-07:00

Time Insurance Company, which does business under the name Assurant Health, was recently blasted with what is one of the largest verdicts in Colorado history involving insurance bad faith. Jurors handed down a $37 million verdict against the company after a more than week-long trial in Boulder County District Court that began January 19, 2010. The plaintiff in the case accused the insurer of wrongfully rescinding her individual policy after she submitted claims for medical treatment she received following a serious car accident. Assurant, on the other hand, claimed that the plaintiff had misrepresented her health history in the application process and that if the true facts had been known, the company would not have issued the medical coverage to the plaintiff in the first place. This case, while unusual in the size of the verdict, is representative of the situations that many people face after trying to complete an application for life, health, or disability insurance that is confusing or impossibly broad.

Bernall v. State Farm Mutual Insurance Company, Case No. 09CV410

2010-01-28T16:20:00.006-07:00

Bernall v. State Farm Mutual Insurance Company, Case No. 09CV410

Mike Rosenberg & Jeremy Sitcoff of the law firm Roberts Levin Rosenberg PC represented the Plaintiff in this action for bad faith breach of an automobile insurance contract stemming from a catastrophic car accident.

Upon completion of a 3-day jury trial in front of the Honorable Margie Enquist in Jefferson County, Colorado, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the Plaintiff for $502,475.44 finding that State Farm had breached its duty of good faith and fair dealing by acting unreasonably in failing to settle with the injured party for the policy limits.

The insured party had previously sent a 7-day policy limits demand which State Farm has allowed to expire. State Farm later offered its $100k policy limits in settlement but the injured party refused to take them, opting instead to pursue recovery of an excess judgment against State Farm’s insured.

For more information, please contact us.

Welcome to Our Legal Blog

2009-12-22T16:24:00.001-07:00

Thank you for visiting our blog. Please come back soon for valuable information about insurance law.