Members of the Firm have experience representing banks, major corporations, governmental agencies, and small businesses. The Firm specializes in the defense of self-insured companies in personal injury and property damage claims. The Firm ’s clients have been both plaintiffs and defendants.

We have handled a variety of commercial, business and personal injury cases including, business and contractual disputes, promissory notes and guarantees, defects in workmanship and property damage resulting from negligence, bankruptcy-related litigation matters, collection matters, premises liability lawsuits, asbestos personal injury and property claims, lender liability lawsuits, product liability, insurance coverage disputes, insurance defense, real estate related litigation, and commercial and residential mortgage foreclosures. The Firm has experience in the trial and appeal of civil actions involving both state and federal courts. Described below are a few notable cases the Firm has handled:

• Resolution Trust Corporation, et al. v. American Casualty Insurance Company of Reading Pennsylvania, 874 F. Supp 961 (E.D. Mo. 1995).  The case involved an insurance coverage dispute. Plaintiff, Resolution Trust Corporation ("RTC"), whom we represented along with our co-counsel, sought a declaration of rights under or reformation of directors and officers liability insurance policies purchased by Community Federal Savings and Loan Association, St. Louis, Missouri ("Community Federal") from Defendant American Casualty Company of Reading, Pennsylvania ("American Casualty").  The RTC requested an order establishing coverage under the policies for the claims asserted by RTC against certain of Community Federal's former directors and officers in another pending lawsuit in the Eastern District of Missouri, RTC v. Fiala et al., Cause No. 4:93CV2613 JCH.  Some of the former directors and officers ("Intervenors") intervened in RTC's case against American Casualty. The RTC, the Intervenors and American Casualty each filed motions for summary judgment.

  The Court held that American Casualty's tendering of a policy with a significant change in coverage constituted a constructive nonrenewal.  The nonrenewal triggered sections 7(b) and 2(b) of the 1982 policy.  The Court further found that American Casualty should have given Community Federal written notice thirty (30) days in advance of the nonrenewal and that Community Federal was entitled to extended coverage under section 2(b). The Court further held that the litigation filed by the RTC against the Intervenors related back to the notice of claims dated April 11, 1986. The case was settled thereafter by the parties.

• Resolution Trust Corporation v. Kenneth Fiala, et al., 870 F. Supp. 962 (E.D. Mo 1994).  Plaintiff, Resolution Trust Corporation ("RTC"), whom we represented along with co-counsel, brought this lawsuit in its corporate capacity against the Defendants who were former officers and directors of Community Federal Savings and Loan Association, St. Louis, Missouri ("Community Federal ").  On December 14, 1990, RTC took possession of Community Federal and, as receiver, succeeded to all of the assets, rights, titles, powers, and privileges of Community Federal as well as the rights of its shareholders, members, account holders, depositors, directors, and officers.

  In its complaint, the RTC alleged that Defendants engaged in high-risk real estate venture development projects, investments, and related loans resulting in losses to Community Federal of more than $100 million.  Specifically, Plaintiff RTC alleged that: (1) Defendants engaged in speculation with depositor funds; (2) Defendants failed to heed safe and sound banking principles requiring careful underwriting and scrutiny of proposed projects; (3) Defendants failed to secure and sufficiently analyze information and documentation prudent directors and officers should have required to assure depositors' funds would not be placed at high risk of being squandered; and (4) Defendants failed to conduct the affairs of Community Federal and the wholly-owned subsidiaries of Community Federal they utilized to pursue these projects as prudent fiduciaries. Plaintiff sought damages for breach of fiduciary duty, negligence and gross negligence.

  Defendants filed five (5) separate motions to dismiss.  The Court ruled against the Defendants on all five (5) motions. Following the entry of the Court's Order, the Defendants sought to take an interlocutory appeal to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. That request was denied by the Court. The case was thereafter settled by the parties.

• Resolution Trust Corporation v. Gershman, et al., 829 F. Supp 1095 (E.D. Mo. 1993).  We represented, along with co-counsel, the Plaintiff, Resolution Trust Corporation ("RTC") which brought this action as receiver of Missouri Savings Association, F.A.  The Defendants were the former officers and directors of Missouri Savings Association.  Plaintiff alleged that the Defendants originated and approved large, poorly underwritten commercial real estate loans resulting in losses to Missouri Savings of more than $39 million.  Plaintiff sought damages for breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, gross negligence, and an accounting of Defendants' financial circumstances for the past five (5) years.

  Defendants filed separate motions to dismiss. The Court held that Plaintiffs' negligence and breach of fiduciary duty claims stated causes of action for which relief could be granted.  The Court, however, dismissed the gross negligence and accounting claims. The case was thereafter settled by the parties.

In an effort to control litigation costs, our attorneys perform a thoughtful and creative analysis of the issues presented in the case, within the first ninety (90) days following receipt of a file, so that an effective defense strategy can be put into place early in the case. Using this approach, it has been our experience that many cases can be disposed of rather early in the litigation process. We have been successful in disposing of many of these cases through the use of well-aimed defense motions, which have obviated the need for a jury trial as demonstrated by a few of our results noted below:

• Defense Motion for Summary Judgment (St. Louis City Circuit Court). Plaintiffs filed this wrongful death lawsuit in the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, against nine (9) defendants seeking damages from his exposure to asbestos-containing products. We represented Defendant utility company. The gravamen of Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant utility company was that as the owner of the premises where the Decedent was allegedly exposed to asbestos, it owed a duty of reasonable care to him and breached that duty. It was a claim for direct negligence.

  Following extensive discovery and the filing of a motion for summary judgment, Defendant utility company was voluntarily dismissed from the lawsuit.

• Defense Motion for Summary Judgment (St. Louis City Circuit Court). Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against our client, a utility company, and Defendant homeowner, seeking $8 million in damages for injuries she sustained in an automobile accident.  Plaintiff was a passenger in an automobile driven by her husband. Plaintiff’s spouse died from injuries sustained in the accident. She subsequently filed a wrongful death lawsuit against both Defendants.  According to Plaintiff, the automobile left the traveled portion of the road and entered the yard of Defendant homeowner striking a utility pole which was owned by Defendant utility company. The lawsuit alleged that the utility company was negligent with respect to the placement, location, maintenance and/or the condition of the utility pole and that such negligence was the proximate cause of her injuries.

  Following extensive discovery in the Plaintiff’s personal injury lawsuit, we filed a motion for summary judgment on behalf of the Defendant utility company which was granted by the Court.

• Defense Motion for Summary Judgment (St. Louis County Circuit Court). This case involved a claim for medical malpractice. The Plaintiff sued several doctors and nurses contending that they were negligent in their treatment of him while he was in the hospital for heart surgery. Our firm was retained by the insurance company to represent one of the nurse Defendants. Following discovery, a motion for summary judgment was filed on behalf of that Defendant, which the court granted.

• Defense Motion for Summary Judgment (United States District Court, E.D. Mo.). This was a lawsuit against the Defendant arising out of his failure to pay promissory notes guaranteed by him. We obtained summary judgment against the Defendant in amount of $210,990.77, plus full payment of attorneys’ fees.

• Defense Motion for Summary Judgment (United States District Court, E.D. Mo.). This was a lawsuit brought against Defendants for breach of their guarantees. We obtained summary judgment against the Defendants in the amount of $9,033,429.55, plus payment of attorneys’ fees.

• Defense Motion for Summary Judgment (United States District Court, E.D. Mo.). This was a lawsuit against the Defendants for failure to pay $2,480,000 pursuant to their guarantees. We obtained summary judgment in the District Court for the full amount due, plus payment of attorneys’ fees.

• Defense Motion for Summary Judgment (St. Louis City Circuit Court). This was a landowner’s liability lawsuit brought against Defendant utility company. Following discovery, a motion for summary judgment was filed on behalf of Defendant, which the Court granted.

Firm attorneys are also skilled in the construction and negotiation of settlements and alternative dispute resolution techniques. It is our belief that certain cases are best handled in a forum other than a formal courtroom, and we have advised clients to use an alternative forum when it was in their best interest to do so. We thoroughly evaluate the merits of a case and assist with the selection of a mediator whose skills, approach and expertise will most likely facilitate the resolution of the dispute. Our extensive mediation experience compliments the trial practice services we offer our clients.

Finally, to ensure that the client has current and complete information on the status of their particular matters, status reports are provided on a quarterly, semi-annual or annual basis, and litigation or other legal service budgets can be provided depending on the desire of the client.