In a malpractice case, Marc Zimet’s client, an insurance broker, was sued by a client for alleged errors in negligently preparing an insurance application. The insurer based its coverage decision on these purported errors.
When the insurer cross-complained against our client for various tort and indemnity claims, we demurred to the cross-complaint asserting novel, creative arguments based on obscure references in pre-existing case law and a recent decision.
The court sustained our client’s demurrer without leave to amend, thereby forcing plaintiff, the insurer and all other parties to re-evaluate their respective positions against our client. The parties ultimately reached a nuisance settlement highly favorable to the firm’s client.