|
|
Welcome to Gray Matters, Gray·Duffy, LLP’s seasonal newsletter, keeping you up-to-date on legal trends and firm news. If you’d like to be removed from our list, please click the “SafeUnsubscribe” button at the bottom of this email. |
Gray·Duffy: Year in Review
As 2012 begins, we at Gray·Duffy celebrate the beginning of our 27th year of service to our clients. Throughout 2011, we diversified and strengthened the firm’s expertise with the addition of Ed Scott as a partner in our Redwood City office. Ed brought with him many long-time clients and has added depth to our Insurance and Construction Law practice as well as provided a unique expertise with his knowledge of Equine Law.
We again achieved outstanding results for clients in a number of our practice areas. To read more on our recent achievements, please click on the cases below:
Gray·Duffy resolves construction defect case for general contractor defendant without payment toward settlement and recovers attorney fees.
Gray·Duffy negotiates favorable settlement for crane company in construction site accident and recovers attorney fees and costs.
Overall, we couldn’t be more proud of the work that our skilled professionals perform on a daily basis for the firm. From an in-depth knowledge of the law, the issues that impact our clients, to the responsiveness and dedication they offer, they are committed to ensuring that our client’s legal experience is a positive one.
On behalf of all of us at Gray·Duffy, we appreciate your business and value our relationship. We look forward to serving you again soon.
We wish you a successful and fulfilling year.
Sincerely,
Gary S. Gray, Managing Partner
|
 Reducing Risk, Shifting Liability:
Assessing the Privette Doctrine
By: Michelle MacDonald
Published in Crane Hot Line
 In California, property owners and general contractors can shift liability away from themselves for injuries to subcontractor employees through a legal doctrine known as Privette after the landmark 1993 case of the same name. Essentially, what the California Supreme Court found in that case was that, in the absence of affirmative negligence by the owners and/or general contractors which actually caused the injury, the subcontractors are in the best position to protect the welfare of their own employees through the workers compensation system.Over the years, exceptions have been carved out of the original holding including for the supplying of defective equipment and for failing to warn of hidden dangerous conditions. One exception, which has been legally controversial, may be decided by the California Supreme Court shortly in the case of Seabright Insurance v. Lujan. Specifically, the Court is expected to determine when a statutory duty (such as Cal/OSHA requirements) may be delegated to subcontractors and when such regulations are non-delegable. To the extent a duty is non-delegable and the failure to comply actually caused an injury, Privette would then not apply because it would be considered a form of affirmative negligence.
|
|
The Role of the Spouse in Mediation
Published in Daily Journal
Winston Churchill once said, “My most brilliant achievement was my ability to be able to persuade my wife to marry me.” As much as I agree with him, I never thought I could relate his prophetic statement to the mediation process. But there’s a tool that is available to most mediation processes and is more often than not completely overlooked: The spouse as a decision maker.
Today’s mediation landscape has become increasingly more complex in terms of what it takes to bring a dispute to a reasoned resolution. A mediator’s “bag of tricks” now, more than ever, needs to include every available tool that might be useful in bringing the parties to settlement. A concerned and thoughtful spouse may be such a tool.
Continue reading The Role of the Spouse in Mediation.
|
|
15760 Ventura Blvd., 16th Floor
Encino, CA 91436
(818) 907-4000
702 Marshall Street, Suite 600
Redwood City, CA 94063
(650) 365-7343 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
So You Think You Know
The Law… |
|
Test your knowledge on issues related to insurance coverage/bad faith by answering the following questions:
1. A general liability insurer’s duty to defend is not only determined by the policy and the allegations in the complaint, but also on facts that are extrinsic to the complaint. (True/False)
2. In a tort action for wrongful denial of policy benefits, an insured may be entitled to its attorneys’ fees incurred to compel payment of benefits due under an insurance policy. (True/False)
3. If a complaint alleges punitive damages, it automatically entitles the insured to appointment of independent counsel. (True/False)
4. If there is a continuous loss, a general liability insurance carrier can reduce its liability by “stacking” deductibles or self-insured retentions (SIRs) under other policies. (True/False)
5. A contribution action between liability insurers should be brought within two years from the date of the plaintiff insurer’s last payment in the underlying lawsuit. (True/False)
Please contact Wendy Lin Suh if you have any questions about insurance coverage/bad faith.
|
|
Firm Announcements
|
|
Gray·Duffy is pleased to welcome the firm’s new clients: NBIS,
Markel Insurance and Gallagher Bassett.
NBIS is a Managing General Underwriting Organization specializing in construction and related transport program coverage.
Markel Insurance provides property and casualty coverage for specialty insurance products.
Gallagher Bassett is the largest property/casualty third-party administrator, offering services in the areas of claims management, information management, medical cost containment and consultative services.
View a full list of Gray·Duffy’s representative clients.
New Gray·Duffy Website
In order to better serve our clients and friends, Gray·Duffy’s website has a new look and feel. Please take a moment to look at our new website.
|
|
|
|
|
Gray Matters is provided for informational purposes only, and the contents are not intended and should not be construed as legal advice.
© 2012 – Gray·Duffy, LLP. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without written permission.
|
|
|
