Fred Valz and Mallory Ball obtained a ruling from the Middle District of Georgia granting summary judgment in favor of their insurer client in a declaratory judgement action.  The case sought a declaration as to whether the insurer was required to provide coverage, indemnity or a defense where the policyholder’s worker drove the policyholder’s vehicle without permission, subsequently causing an accident.  They argued on behalf of the insurer that the driver was not an insured under the policy because he did not have permission to operate the vehicle at the time of the accident.  The Middle District of Georgia agreed and granted summary judgment in favor of their client.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz and Mallory Ball successfully defended plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in a subrogation suit.  Fred and Mallory argued on behalf of the insured driver that questions of fact remain as to liability of the underlying accident, including the contributory negligence of plaintiff’s insured driver.  They further argued that there was a question of material fact as to the correct amount of damages owed to plaintiff’s insured pursuant to the contracts.  The State Court of Fulton County agreed, denying summary judgment, which resulted in a voluntary dismissal of the suit.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Melissa Bailey and Fred Valz recently won summary judgment for a non-emergency transportation broker.  The complaint alleged that our client acted as a carrier rather than a broker, making our client vicariously liable for the motor vehicle accident that resulted in the loss of the plaintiff’s leg.  We argued that our client was a broker, not a carrier, and therefore had no legal liability for the alleged negligence of the driver.  The State Court of Clayton County agreed, holding that our client did not maintain the requisite level of control over the driver or her employer to impose vicarious liability, resulting in a full grant of summary judgment for our client.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz and Melissa Bailey recently obtained a complete dismissal of bad faith and breach of contract claim alleging seven figures in damages.  Litigated in the Middle District of Georgia, the suit alleged the commercial insurer acted in bad faith and breached the policy in three distinct ways in handling a first-party claim for damage to a medical facility.  After successfully bifurcating the bad faith and breach of contract claims, Melissa and Fred argued that the three breach of contract claims failed on their merits.  The District Court agreed, granting summary judgment on all three breach of contract claims.  After disposing of the breach of contract claims, the Court ruled that the bad faith claim could not survive in the absence of a breach of a policy obligation by the carrier.  Given that, it also failed as a matter of law, resulting in the complete dismissal of the lawsuit.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Melissa Bailey and Fred Valz won summary judgment in a case alleging property damage as a result of a fallen tree.  We argued that the property owner was not liable for the damage caused by the fallen tree because there was insufficient evidence that the tree was patently diseased prior to it falling down.  The plaintiff argued that she had warned our business-owner client that she believed the tree was diseased several months prior.  Granting our motion for summary judgment, the trial court held that the plaintiff had failed to carry her burden of proving patent damage to the tree, and summary judgment was appropriate in favor of our landowner client.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Melissa Bailey and Fred Valz obtained summary judgment in a declaratory judgment action on the basis of the policy’s auto business exclusion.  The evidence showed that, at the time of the accident, it was being driven by a mechanic who was returning the vehicle to its owner after completing repairs.  Because the driver was in possession of the vehicle for the sole purpose of repairing it, we argued that coverage was afforded for the underlying tort action because the claims arose out of the use of a vehicle in furtherance of an auto business.  The Superior Court of Fulton County agreed, ruling that our client had no duty to provide a defense, coverage, or indemnity in the tort action.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz and Melissa Bailey won summary judgment in the Northern District of Georgia on behalf of their insurance carrier client.  We argued on behalf of the carrier that no coverage was afforded under the commercial policy because the driver did not meet the policy definition of an insured person.  The Court agreed, holding that the driver’s use of a personal vehicle took him outside the policy definition of an insured person.  As a result, the insurer had no duty to provide a defense, coverage, or indemnity to the insured or his employer for the tort suit.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz and Melissa Bailey obtained summary judgment for their insurer client in a first party bad faith action.  The insured claimed that the carrier wrongfully denied coverage for a commercial cargo loss and that denial constituted bad faith under Georgia law.  Ruling in favor of the carrier, the Gwinnett County State Court upheld the carrier’s denial, ruling that there was no coverage for the loss and, as a result, all of the insured’s claims against the carrier, including the claim for bad faith, failed as a matter of law.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz and Melissa Bailey recently won summary judgment for their international oil carrier client in a premises liability case.  The oil company licensed the use of its brand to a station operator, and it was subsequently sued for personal injuries sustained by a customer at the station.  We argued that, because there was not an agency relationship or joint venture between the oil company and the station owner, the oil company could not be held liable for the acts or omissions of the station owner.  The State Court of DeKalb County agreed, and summary judgment was granted in favor of our client.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz and Melissa Bailey recently secured summary judgment for a commercial auto carrier following a fatal fall from an aerial ladder.  The decedent was extended in the air on a boom ladder affixed to the bed of a commercial vehicle when he fell from its basket.  We argued on behalf of the carrier that no coverage was afforded under the policy because the loss arose when the vehicle was being used solely as a pedestal for the ladder rather than as a vehicle.  The Northern District of Georgia agreed and ruled that, as a matter of law, the policy did not provide coverage for the loss.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz and Mallory Ball obtained summary judgment on behalf of a UM carrier from litigation in the State Court of Fulton County.  Fred and Mallory argued on behalf of the UM carrier that the plaintiff failed to provide them with prompt notice of the accident.  This is a condition precedent to coverage under the policy, where plaintiff failed to notify the UM carrier until 21 months after the accident.  The trial court agreed and granted the UM carrier’s motion for summary judgment.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz and Melissa Bailey recently obtained a ruling from the State Court of Chatham County granting summary judgment in favor of their landlord client in a dog bite case.  Ruling in the property owner’s favor, the Court held that, as an out-of-possession landlord, the property owner was not liable for the torts of its tenants, including the alleged failure to adequately control the subject dog.  The Court further held that the plaintiff failed to prove that the property owner had superior knowledge of the alleged hazard posed by the dog, a separate basis for the grant of summary judgment.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz and Melissa Bailey recently obtained a ruling from the Northern District of Georgia granting summary judgment in favor of their insurer client in a declaratory judgment action.  The case sought a declaration as to whether the insurer was required to provide coverage, indemnity, or a defense under a homeowner’s policy for injuries caused as a result of a fight.  We argued on behalf of the insurer that the fight did not constitute an occurrence as defined by the policy, so no coverage was afforded therefor.  Granting summary judgment in favor of the insurer, the Court ruled that the insured’s participation in the fight was not without foresight or design and, for that reason, it did not constitute a covered occurrence.  Given that, the insurer was not obligated to provide coverage, a defense, or indemnity for the incident.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz and Melissa Bailey recently prevailed in the Georgia Court of Appeals on an appeal from the denial of their client’s motion for summary judgment in a premises liability claim. The case involved a plaintiff who fell from a ladder while trimming a tree limb on private property. The plaintiff alleged that the resident defendants had tampered with his ladder, resulting in the safety mechanism becoming unlatched. On appeal, we argued that the denial of our client’s motion for summary judgment was improper because the plaintiff had provided no evidence beyond his own speculation that there was any foul play afoot. Reversing the trial court, the Court of Appeals agreed, stating that a conclusion that the defendants tampered with the ladder, causing it to fall, “would be mere conjecture.” Barclay v. Stephenson, 337 Ga. App. 365 (2016).

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz and Melissa Bailey obtained a ruling from the Northern District of Georgia granting summary judgment in favor of their insurer client in a declaratory judgment action.  The case sought a declaration as to whether the insurer was required to provide coverage, indemnity or a defense where the policyholder failed to pay the initial premium associated with the policy.  We argued on behalf of the insurer that the policy was void from inception due to a failure of consideration, and no coverage was afforded for that reason.  The District Court for the Northern District of Georgia agreed and granted summary judgment in favor of our client, holding that the failure of consideration meant that no contract was created, and the insurer was not obligated to provide coverage, a defense, or indemnity for the accident. Progressive Premier Ins. Co. of Ill. v. Dara Gibbs, et al., Civil Action File No. 1:15-CV-2662-TWT, 2016 WL 1557413 (N.D. Ga. Apr. 18, 2016).

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz and Melissa Bailey obtained a ruling from the Georgia Court of Appeals reversing the trial court’s denial of their client’s motion for summary judgment and ruling in favor of our client.  The case involved a worker’s compensation carrier who attempted to enforce its lien against the alleged third party tortfeasor.  The tort suit had already been litigated and settled, and our client argued that the carrier was barred from bringing a separate action to enforce the lien against a third party.  Reversing the trial court, the Court of Appeals held that the worker’s compensation carrier could not maintain a direct action against the alleged tortfeasor because it failed to protect its lien through intervention in the tort case as required by O.C.G.A. § 34-9-11.1. Schecter v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 335 Ga. App. 30 (2015) (cert denied).

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirms summary judgment to a trucking insurer in a declaratory judgment action, finding there was no coverage for the claims made by the excluded driver under the $1 million policy for injuries to a truck driver who was driving for the insured company as an independent contractor. A truck driver was severely injured while his tractor trailer was being loaded at a third-party location. He filed suit against a number of entities, including the company for which he was driving as an independent contractor. The insurer filed a declaratory judgment action arguing that there was no coverage for the claims made by the excluded driver because he was an excluded employee under the language of policy. The policy did not define the term employee, but it did contain an MCS-90 endorsement. We argued on behalf of the insurer that “employee” should be defined in accordance with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (“FMCSR”) to include statutory employees and independent contractors, which would exclude coverage for the injured truck driver. The Southern District of Georgia agreed and granted summary judgment to the insurer. On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed, holding that the truck driver was an employee as defined by FMCSR and the definition controlled the use of the term “employee” in the policy. For that reason, there was no coverage for the claims made by the excluded driver under his employer’s policy.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz and Melissa Bailey obtained a ruling from the Georgia Court of Appeals reversing the trial court’s denial of our client’s motion for summary judgment and ruling in favor of our client.  The case involved an interpretation of Georgia’s stacking provisions with respect to uninsured motorist carriers.  We argued that the trial court erred by ruling that our client, as the primary UM carrier, was not entitled to a set-off when its policy was a reduced-by UM policy and the excess UM carrier had an added-on UM policy.  The Court of Appeals agreed with us, ruling that, even though our client was the first in line UM carrier under Georgia’s stacking rules, because it maintained the only reduced-by UM policy, it was entitled to a set-off in the amount of the liability carrier’s policy limits.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz and Melissa Bailey obtained a ruling from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirming the grant of summary judgment to our insurance client in a case involving a question of coverage under a personal automobile policy where the insured failed to notify our Carrier of the loss for thirteen months.  The plaintiff argued that timely notice was not a condition precedent to coverage under the policy and that, even if it was, the thirteen month delay was not unreasonable as a matter of law.  The United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia ruled for our insurance client on its motion for summary judgment, finding that the policy language clearly made timely notice a condition precedent to coverage, and the thirteen month delay in providing notice was unreasonable as a matter of law.  The Eleventh Circuit agreed, affirming the lower court’s ruling in favor of our client.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz obtained a defense verdict in Fulton County State Court in an auto accident case.  In the case, both the plaintiff and the defendant contended that they had the green light and that the other ran a red light.  Plaintiff, who was ejected from his vehicle and was in a coma for weeks, sought $1.7 million in damages for the severe and extensive injuries he sustained.  Despite a sympathetic Plaintiff and an attempt by Plaintiff’s counsel to discredit the defendant, the 12 person jury deliberated for two hours before returning an unanimous verdict in favor of the defendant.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz obtained a ruling from the Georgia Supreme Court, affirming the grant of summary judgment to Allstate in a case involving a question of coverage under a homeowner’s policy for the death of a teenage girl arising from an auto accident.  The plaintiffs/appellants attempted to argue that the exclusion should only apply when the vehicle belongs to or was being operated by an insured under the policy, but the trial court granted summary judgment to Allstate, finding that the policy unambiguously excluded coverage for damages arising from the use of any motor vehicle.  The Court of Appeals confirmed that homeowner’s policies clearly do not provide coverage for damages arising from the use of a motor vehicle, regardless of who owned or was operating the vehicle. Plaintiffs petitioned the Georgia Supreme Court for certiorari on the issue, but the court denied the petition and affirmed the lower courts’ rulings in favor of Allstate. Sauls v. Allstate Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 326 Ga. App. 821, 757 S.E.2d 455 (2014), cert. denied Case No. S14C1093 (Sept. 22, 2014).

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment, obtained by Fred Valz, in favor of an insurance company in a declaratory judgment action stemming from a 2011 auto accident. The Plaintiff's sixteen year-old daughter was killed in the accident, which occurred after their daughter and other minors had allegedly been socializing and drinking at the home of the insureds. Plaintiff filed suit against the insureds, and the insureds sought coverage under their homeowner’s policy issued. The insurance company, in turn, filed a declaratory judgment action seeking a judicial declaration that the homeowner’s policy excluded coverage for damages arising from the use of any motor vehicle. The Plaintiff argued that the exclusion applied only when the insured exercised control over the motor vehicle. However, the Court of Appeals and the trial court rejected this argument. Instead, the courts accepted Mr. Valz’ position that “any motor vehicle” was not limited to motor vehicles owned or operated by or under the control of the insured, but applied to motor vehicles owned or operated by any person. Accordingly, the Court of Appeals confirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the insurer and ruled as a matter of law that the insurer had no further duty to defend or indemnify the insureds in the underlying tort action.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Rome Division granted partial summary judgment in favor of an insurance carrier in a declaratory judgment action. The insured failed to satisfy a condition precedent to coverage under the policy when he failed to timely provide notice of a motor vehicle accident to the insurance carrier. The court held that coverage available to the third parties for claims arising out of the accident, if any, was limited to the statutory minimum bodily injury liability limits. This matter was successfully handled by Fred Valz and Beth Albright.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz obtained summary judgment in favor of an insurance company in a declaratory judgment action in federal court stemming from a 2011 automobile accident. The at-fault driver and his father sought coverage for the accident under an auto policy as well as a homeowner’s policy. Mr. Valz successfully argued that the driver was not an “insured person” as defined by the auto or homeowner’s policies, the driver’s father was not an “insured person” as defined by the auto policy in relation to the accident, and the homeowner’s policy did not cover liability stemming from automobile accidents or negligent entrustment of an automobile. Accordingly, the court ruled that the insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify the driver or his father in the underlying tort lawsuit.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz represented an insurer who sought a declaration that an intentional/criminal act exclusion in its policy barred coverage above the minimum limits for an insured who struck a man attempting to repossess her vehicle. The court found that while there was no evidence of the insured’s actual intent, the policy excluded coverage based on what a reasonable person in the insured’s shoes would know. The court concluded that when the insured drove her vehicle forward knowing the pedestrian was standing directly in front of the vehicle, a reasonable person in the insured’s situation would realize that injury likely would result. Thus, the exclusion applied to bar coverage over the minimum Georgia limits.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz obtained a grant of summary judgment for their insurer client on the issue of whether the insurer acted in bad faith in denying coverage for a negligent entrustment claim filed against the parents of an excluded driver. The policy excluded coverage for “any claim” arising from an accident involving a vehicle operated by the excluded driver, including any claim for vicarious liability. The plaintiff claimed the exclusion was ambiguous because the “any claim” language was limited only to vicarious liability claims as a result of the language immediately following it. The United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia disagreed, finding the exclusion was not ambiguous. The “including” language did not limit the “any claim” provision, but merely provided an example of one type of claim—of many—that would not be covered if an excluded driver was operating the vehicle.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz recently represented an insurer in a declaratory judgment action arising from a golf cart accident at a political fundraising event. The United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia granted the insurer’s motion for summary judgment, finding that the insurer’s automobile insurance policy did not provide coverage for injuries arising from the golf cart accident. The Court concluded that the golf cart lacked the safety and other features present on vehicles designed for use on public roads, and even though it was capable of being driven on roadways, the golf cart did not meet the policy definition of “auto” because it was not designed for use “principally upon public roads.”

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of an insurer in declaratory judgment action. The insured had been convicted of murdering his wife and had been sued in a subsequent wrongful death action by his wife’s parents. The Court of Appeals held that the intentional/criminal acts exclusion contained in a homeowner's policy precluded coverage. Accordingly, the Court held that the insurer had no obligation to defend or indemnify the insured in the underlying wrongful death. This case was defended by Fred Valz.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz and Beth Albright defended an insured automobile owner and his friend. A car thief stole the insured's vehicle and crashed into innocent motorists. The motorists filed suit against the insured and his friend, who were following the thief in another vehicle at time of the accident. The Superior Court, DeKalb County, entered summary judgment in favor of the insured owner and friend and the motorists appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed the grant of summary judgment, ruling that the motorists presented no evidence showing that owner and friend breached any duty by following the car thief and that they presented no evidence of a causal connection between their following and the subsequent accident. The Supreme Court denied Plaintiffs' Petition for Cert.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz was affirmed on appeal by the Court of Appeals of Georgia in a case of first impression upholding a 1995 amendment to the Georgia Workers' Compensation Act. They represented a local painting company in a wrongful death claim involving an employee of a temporary contracting firm. Valz and Moore received summary judgment for the defense in the trial court, contending the defendant was immune from suit under the Workers' Compensation Act ("WCA"). Valz and Moore were affirmed on appeal on April 28, 2010.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

On November 12, 2009, Fred Valz obtained a defense verdict in a trucking case in Spalding County State Court. The lawsuit arose from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on a dark and foggy morning on a rural highway in Georgia. The Plaintiff rear-ended the Defendant's garbage truck, which was stopped partially in the highway. The Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant's truck was operating without any rear lights on at the time of the accident and produced two witnesses that saw the Defendant's truck without rear lights on shortly before the accident. The Plaintiff claimed she suffered a severe and permanent traumatic brain injury and could never return to gainful employment. The defense presented expert testimony that the Plaintiff did not have any cognitive deficits and could return to her previous job. After two and half hours, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the Defendants.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz defended an insurer who had issued a policy of auto liability insurance and an excess liability policy. The insurer was served with a lawsuit as a purported uninsured motorist carrier. The excess insurance policy, issued in North Carolina, had liability limits of $1 Million but did not provide uninsured motorist benefits. The insurer tendered the limits under the liability policy but failed to timely respond to certain Requests for Admissions seeking affirmation of coverage for uninsured motorist benefits under the excess policy and such requests were deemed admitted. Additionally, the named defendant failed to answer and default judgment was entered against him in the amount of $854,727.04. Fred and Erica moved to set aside the admissions and Plaintiff moved to impose sanctions against the insurer for failure to respond to discovery. After extensive briefings and oral argument, the court granted the insurer's Motion to Set Aside Admissions and denied the Motion for Sanctions. Because the admissions were withdrawn, the Plaintiff could not obtain any further recovery under the policy, and he dismissed his claims against the insurer.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz defended a homeowners' insurer against claims for coverage for an accident that occurred away from the insured premises. The parents of a teenage girl were hosting her birthday party at a field belonging to family friends where guests could ride four-wheelers and engage in other outdoor activities. The teenager and her friend were seriously injured when the four-wheeler they were riding turned over. The parents sought coverage for the injuries under their homeowners' policy of insurance, contending that the field, located several miles from the insured premises, was being used "in connection with the insured premises." In affirming summary judgment in favor of the insurer, the Court of Appeals rejected this argument, explaining that adoption of such an expansive definition of "insured premises" would expose insurers to virtually endless liability. Mason v. Allstate, 2009 WL 1636588.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz filed a declaratory judgment action on behalf of an automobile insurer, contending that the insurer had no further duty to defend or indemnify its insured because she breached her duty under the policy to cooperate with the insurer and because she and and her assignees engaged in fraudulent conduct designed to manufacture a bad faith claim against the insurer. Following submission of letter briefs, the District Court held that insurer did not act in bad faith in paying policy limits without conditioning payment on release of its insured. Accordingly, the Court granted the insurer's Petition for Declaratory Judgment and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed on appeal. In an unpublished opinion, the District Court also dismissed, sua sponte, the assignees' lawsuit for bad faith.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

On November 24, 2008, Fred Valz successfully obtained a reversal of the trial court's denial of partial summary judgment in a wrongful death case where the priority of three UM insurance policies were at issue. On motion for summary judgment, the Carlock Copeland attorneys argued that their client's auto policy should come last in priority under the "more closely identified with" test because it was originally issued to the decedent's sister, whereas the other auto policy and umbrella policy were issued to the decedent's father. The trial court denied summary judgment, in part, finding that the umbrella policy was last in priority because auto policies by definition apply before umbrella policies. The Court of Appeals reversed holding that umbrella policies should be stacked like other policies to provide UM coverage and, therefore, the Carlock Copeland client's auto policy came last in priority under the "more closely identified with" test.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz represented a commercial property owner in an elevator malfunction case. The plaintiff, who was a paraplegic, claimed that he rolled his wheelchair into an elevator and that when he reached his desired floor, he backed out of the elevator. According to the plaintiff, he did not realize the elevator floor had stopped above the landing and, when he backed out of the elevator, his wheelchair fell out of the elevator. As a result, the plaintiff claimed he sustained severe personal injuries. Fred argued that the property owner was not liable because the elevator had been inspected the day prior to the incident and again on the morning of the incident during routine inspections. The inspections revealed no problems with the elevator. The trial court granted summary judgment to the property owner and the Court of Appeals affirmed finding that the property owner did not have superior knowledge of any problems with the elevator.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz represented United National Insurance Company and the Court granted United National Insurance Company's motion for summary judgment. United National had issued an umbrella policy which was excess to a commercial general liability policy issued by Essex Insurance Company. The Court held that both the Essex CGL policy and the United National umbrella policy did not provide liability coverage in the case involving an alleged employee who was injured during the course of his employment.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz obtained summary judgment on behalf of Progressive Casualty Insurance Company. Empire Fire and Marine made a voluntary payment under their motor vehicle policy and contended that Progressive had improperly denied coverage and was jointly liable. The Court granted Progressive's motion for summary judgment and held that Progressive had no coverage in the case.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz was successful in a motion for summary judgment on a declaratory judgment action. That case involved a sexual assault claim and the Court granted the insurer's motion for summary judgment, holding that claims for the alleged sexual assault were not covered under either a homeowner's or umbrella policy.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz was successful in a jury trial of a declaratory judgment action on September 10, 2005, before the Honorable K. Dawson Jackson in the Superior Court of Gwinnett County. The case involved the validity of a named driver exclusion endorsement in a commercial automobile insurance company policy.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Fred Valz was successful in a declaratory judgment action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, before the Honorable William S. Duffey, Jr. The declaratory judgment action involved a dispute between insurers as to whether the underlying insurance policy provided coverage for a sexual assault claim. Mr. Valz was successful in recovering $850,000 for the umbrella carrier who had fronted a settlement and then made a claim against the underlying insurer.

For informational purposes only. Past success does not indicate the likelihood of success in future cases.

Carlock, Copeland & Stair hosted their annual Insurance Coverage & Bad Faith Seminar on August 24 at the Atlanta Botanical Garden. Presentations and Presenters: Have Traditional Rules Gone Up in Smoke?  Impact of Growing Legalization of Medical Marijuana - Dave Root and Abby Grozine. Best Practices for Maintaining Your Claims File - Ryan Wilhelm, Jennifer Guerra, and Claire Sumner. Defending the Institutional Bad Faith Claim - Charlie McDaniel and Kathy Carlsten. New Technology, Old Policies:  Are Aging Policies Equipped to Handle the Consumer Technology Boom? - Fred Valz and Melissa Bailey. Apportionment:  Has It Gotten Insurers Where They Want To Go?  - Charlie McDaniel, Graham Thompson, and Kristen Thompson. Additional Insured Jeopardy - Alex Davis, Laura Paton, Sarah Wetmore, Sally Bright and Nick Stewart. Why the Involvement of a Tractor Trailer Escalates a Case - Gary Lovell. Risk-Averse Insurers and the New Juror:  Exploring Possible Links Between Fewer Trials, Millennial Jurors, and Seemingly Bigger Verdicts - Doug Smith and Lee Weatherly. Please contact Michelle Mattox at mmattox@cskl.law if you would like our attorneys to present in-house lunch & learn sessions or webinars.  

Carlock Copeland’s Annual Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Seminar for claims professionals serving Georgia, South Carolina and Tennessee was held at the Atlanta Botanical Garden on September 15. Melissa Bailey, Jack Daniel, Alex Davis, Charlie McDaniel, David Root, Fred Valz, Lee Weatherly, Sarah Wetmore and Ryan Wilhelm presented. Topics included: • Litigating Coverage Issues Through Appeal • Construction Defect Coverage Issues • Rescinding Policies • Effective Denials and Reservation of Rights Letters • Interplay of Underwriting and Claims • Coverage Issues Involving Additional Insureds • Litigation Coverage Issues In Trucking Policies • Coverage Issues in a Sharing Economy Please contact Michelle Mattox at mmattox@cskl.law for more information.

Fred Valz served as a panelist at the ABA TIPS 2016 Section Conference in Atlanta on May 11-13, 2016.  Fred’s panel addressed “Ethics in the Insurance Industry and the Triparte Relationship” on May 11.  John Rogers and Billy Newcomb attended.

Fred Valz presented "Litigating the Insurance Claim/Bad Faith Case – Insurer Perspective" at the Comprehensive Insurance Law Conference in Atlanta, March 24 & 25, 2016.

February 19, 2016 Carlock, Copeland & Stair, LLP is proud to announce our lawyers selected for inclusion on the Georgia Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars® lists for 2016. Thomas S. Carlock and Johannes S. Kingma have been selected for inclusion on the Top 100 Super Lawyers® in the State of Georgia. Only five percent of the lawyers in the state are named by Super Lawyers®. The selections for this esteemed list are made by the research team at Super Lawyers®, which is a service of Thomson Reuters. Each year, the research team at Super Lawyers® undertakes a rigorous multi-phase selection process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent evaluation of candidates by the attorney-led research staff, a peer review of candidates by practice area, and a good-standing and disciplinary check. Top 100 for the State of Georgia - Super Lawyers® Thomas S. Carlock - Top Rated Civil Litigation Attorney in Atlanta, Georgia Johannes S. Kingma - Top Rated Professional Liability Attorney in Atlanta, Georgia Super Lawyers® Thomas S. Carlock - Civil Litigation: Defense Wade K. Copeland - Civil Litigation: Defense Eric J. Frisch - Personal Injury Medical Malpractice: Defense Johannes S. Kingma - Professional Liability: Defense D. Gary Lovell, Jr. - Personal Injury Medical Malpractice: Defense David F. Root - General Litigation Douglas W. Smith - Personal Injury General: Defense Kent T. Stair - Professional Liability: Defense Frederick M. Valz, III - Insurance Coverage Rising Stars® is a listing of exceptional lawyers who are 40 years of age or under, or who have been practicing for 10 years or less, and have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. Only 2.5 percent of the total lawyers in the state are honored on the Rising Stars® list. Rising Stars® Shannon M. Sprinkle - Professional Liability: Defense Peter Werdesheim - Professional Liability - Defense

Fred Valz, Charlie McDaniel, and Gary Lovell attended the DRI Insurance Coverage and Practice Symposium held December 3-4 in New York. DRI Annual Conference Brochure - December, 2015 For more information, please click here.

Carlock, Copeland & Stair LLP congratulates the following attorneys who have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America 2018®. These attorneys practice in commercial litigation, medical malpractice law, personal injury litigation, construction law, construction litigation, and insurance law. In addition, Gary Lovell has been named Best Lawyers’ 2018 “Lawyer of the Year® for Medical Malpractice – Defendants (Charleston, SC). Thomas S. Carlock • Commercial Litigation (Atlanta, GA) • Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants (Atlanta, GA) • Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants (Atlanta, GA) • Best Lawyers® Since 1991 Kent T. Stair • Construction Law  (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC) • Legal Malpractice Law (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC) • Litigation – Construction (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC) • Best Lawyers® Since 2006 Fred M. Valz, III • Insurance Law (Atlanta, GA) • Best Lawyers® Since 2013 Johannes S. Kingma • Legal Malpractice Law – Defendants (Atlanta, GA) • Best Lawyers® Since 2009 D. Gary Lovell, Jr. • Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC) • Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC) • Lawyer of the Year®, Medical Malpractice – Defendants (Charleston, SC) • Best Lawyers® Since 2013 Rolfe M. Martin • Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants (Atlanta, GA) • Best Lawyers® Since 2017 Since it was first published in 1983, Best Lawyers® has become universally regarded as the definitive guide to legal excellence. Best Lawyers® is based on an exhaustive peer-review survey. More than 83,000 leading attorneys globally are eligible to vote, and Best Lawyers received more than 13 million votes on the legal abilities of other lawyers in their practice areas around the world, with more than 7 million votes being cast in the United States. Lawyers are not required or allowed to pay a fee to be listed, therefore inclusion in Best Lawyers® is considered a singular honor. Corporate Counsel magazine has called Best Lawyers® “the most respected referral list of attorneys in practice.” Please click here for Press Release. For additional information, please visit https://cskl.law/. (Copyright 2015 by Woodward/White, Inc., of Aiken, SC)

Carlock, Copeland & Stair, LLP is proud to announce that several of our lawyers have been selected for inclusion on the Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars® lists for 2017. Super Lawyers® Thomas S. Carlock - Civil Litigation: Defense Wade K. Copeland - Civil Litigation: Defense Eric J. Frisch - Personal Injury Medical Malpractice: Defense Johannes S. Kingma - Professional Liability: Defense D. Gary Lovell, Jr. - Personal Injury Medical Malpractice: Defense David F. Root - General Litigation Douglas W. Smith - Personal Injury General: Defense Kent T. Stair - Professional Liability: Defense Fred M. Valz, III - Insurance Coverage Rising Stars® Shannon M. Sprinkle - Professional Liability: Defense

Shannon Sprinkle has been named Carlock, Copeland & Stair's Firm Managing Partner. David Root, Carlock Copeland's immediate past Managing Partner commented, "Shannon is one of many talented younger lawyers in our firm who are stepping up to provide leadership for us as we continue moving forward." Shannon previously served as General Counsel and Co-Chair of the Commercial Litigation Practice Group. In addition to firm leadership, Shannon will continue her practice as a Partner in the Commercial Litigation Practice Group. Commercial Litigation Practice Group Chair Joe Kingma noted "Shannon has excelled defending lawyers and accountants and also earned the trust of all our partners in her performance as General Counsel. Freeing Shannon from General Counsel and Practice Group responsibilities enables her to lead the firm and still continue to provide A+ service to her clients. We are all excited to have Shannon leading us towards the firm's sixth decade." Shannon's commercial litigation practice centers on professional malpractice, finance, real estate and business related claims. Shannon also frequently acts as outside general counsel to companies and professional service firms providing risk management advice and other consultations. Shannon was a 2016 honoree on The Daily Report's list of lawyers "On the Rise" and has been named on the Georgia Rising Stars list for many consecutive years. Executive Committee Members: Joe Kingma, Firm General Counsel and Chair of the Commercial Litigation Practice Group David Root, Chair of the Employment Practice Group Paul Sperry, Chair of the Construction Practice Group and Managing Partner of the Charleston Office Fred Valz, Chair of General Liability Practice Group Bill Jones, Partner in Design Professional Practice Group Brian Gedeon, Executive Director Other firm leadership roles announced include: Billy Newcomb, Risk Management Counsel and Assistant General Counsel Lynn Olmert, Co-Chair of the Workers' Compensation Practice Group About Carlock, Copeland and Stair, LLP Carlock, Copeland & Stair, LLP focuses on civil litigation and dispute resolution. Founded in 1970, the Firm has office locations in Atlanta, Georgia; Charleston, South Carolina; and Chattanooga, Tennessee. The Firm’s lawyers provide counsel and advice in the following practice areas: Appellate, Commercial Litigation, Construction Litigation, Employment Litigation, Environmental Litigation, General Liability Litigation, Health Care Litigation, Insurance Coverage & Bad Faith Litigation, Product Liability, Trucking & Transportation Litigation, and Workers’ Compensation. For additional information, please visit www.carlockcopeland.com.

Carlock, Copeland & Stair LLP congratulates the following attorneys who have been selected by their peers for inclusion in Best Lawyers in America® 2017: From Our Atlanta Office: Thomas S. Carlock

• Commercial Litigation
• Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants
• Personal Injury Litigation - Defendants
• Best Lawyers® Since 1991

• Legal Malpractice Law – Defendants
• Best Lawyers® Since 2009

• Insurance Law (Atlanta, GA)
• Best Lawyers® Since 2013

• Medical Malpractice Law - Defendants (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC)
• Personal Injury Litigation - Defendants (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC)
• Best Lawyers® Since 2013

• Construction Law –Charleston (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC)
• Legal Malpractice Law – Defendants (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC)
• Litigation – Construction (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC)
• Best Lawyers® Since 2006

February 19, 2016 Carlock, Copeland & Stair, LLP is proud to announce that 13 of our lawyers have been selected for inclusion on the Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars® lists for 2016. Only five percent of the lawyers in the state are named by Super Lawyers®. The selections for this esteemed list are made by the research team at Super Lawyers®, which is a service of Thomson Reuters. Each year, the research team at Super Lawyers® undertakes a rigorous multi-phase selection process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent evaluation of Prcandidates by the attorney-led research staff, a peer review of candidates by practice area, and a good-standing and disciplinary check. Super Lawyers® Thomas S. Carlock - Civil Litigation: Defense Wade K. Copeland - Civil Litigation: Defense Eric J. Frisch - Personal Injury Medical Malpractice: Defense Johannes S. Kingma - Professional Liability: Defense D. Gary Lovell, Jr. - Personal Injury Medical Malpractice: Defense W. Dan McGrew, III - Professional Liability: Defense David F. Root - General Litigation Douglas W. Smith - Personal Injury General: Defense Kent T. Stair - Professional Liability: Defense Frederick M. Valz, III - Insurance Coverage Rising Stars® is a listing of exceptional lawyers who are 40 years of age or under, or who have been practicing for 10 years or less, and have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. Only 2.5 percent of the total lawyers in the state are honored on the Rising Stars® list. Rising Stars® Brent A. Meyer - Construction Litigation Shannon M. Sprinkle - Professional Liability: Defense Peter Werdesheim - Professional Liability - Defense

Please join us at the upcoming DRI Insurance Coverage and Practice Symposium.  Fred Valz, Charlie McDaniel, Gary Lovell will be attending.  The event will be held December 3-4 in New York. DRI Annual Conference Brochure - December, 2015 For more information, please click here.

Carlock, Copeland & Stair LLP congratulates the following attorneys who have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2016: From Our Atlanta Office: Thomas S. Carlock

• Commercial Litigation
• Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants
• Personal Injury Litigation
• Best Lawyers® Since 1991

• Legal Malpractice Law – Defendants
• Best Lawyers® Since 2009

• Insurance Law (Atlanta, GA)
• Best Lawyers® Since 2013

• Medical Malpractice Law (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC)
• Personal Injury Litigation (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC)
• Best Lawyers® Since 2013

• Construction Law –Charleston (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC)
• Legal Malpractice Law – Defendants (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC)
• Litigation – Construction (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC)
• Best Lawyers® Since 2006

Carlock, Copeland & Stair, LLP is proud to announce that 17 of our lawyers have been selected for inclusion on the Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars lists for 2015. Only five percent of the lawyers in the state are named by Super Lawyers. The selections for this esteemed list are made by the research team at Super Lawyers, which is a service of the Thomson Reuters. Each year, the research team at Super Lawyers undertakes a rigorous multi-phase selection process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent evaluation of candidates by the attorney-led research staff, a peer review of candidates by practice area, and a good-standing and disciplinary check. Super Lawyers

• Thomas S. Carlock
• Wade K. Copeland
• Eric J. Frisch
• Johannes S. Kingma
• D. Gary Lovell, Jr.
• W. Dan McGrew
• David F. Root
• Douglas W. Smith
• Kent T. Stair
• Fred M. Valz, III

• John L. Bunyan
• Brent A. Meyer
• Heather H. Miller
• Shannon M. Sprinkle
• Peter Werdesheim

Carlock, Copeland & Stair congratulates Thomas S. Carlock, and Kent T. Stair for being selected as a 2015 Best Lawyers® “Lawyer of the Year” in different practice areas. Only a single lawyer in each practice area and designated metropolitan area is honored as the “Lawyer of the Year,” making this accolade particularly significant. In addition, congratulations to the following attorneys who have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2015: Thomas S. Carlock Commercial Litigation (Atlanta, GA) Medical Malpractice Law – Lawyer of the Year (Atlanta, GA) Personal Injury Litigation (Atlanta, GA) Best Lawyer® Since 1991 Kent T. Stair Construction Law - Lawyer of the Year, Charleston (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC) Legal Malpractice Law (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC) Litigation - Construction (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC) Best Lawyer® Since 2006 Fred M. Valz, III Insurance Law (Atlanta, GA) Best Lawyer® Since 2013 Johannes S. Kingma Legal Malpractice Law (Atlanta, GA) Best Lawyer® Since 2009 D. Gary Lovell, Jr. Personal Injury Litigation (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC) Best Lawyer® Since 2013 Since it was first published in 1983, Best Lawyers has become universally regarded as the definitive guide to legal excellence. Because Best Lawyers is based on an exhaustive peer-review survey in which more than 36,000 leading attorneys cast almost 4.4 million votes on the legal abilities of other lawyers in their practice areas, and because lawyers are not required or allowed to pay a fee to be listed, inclusion in Best Lawyers is considered a singular honor. Corporate Counsel magazine has called Best Lawyers “the most respected referral list of attorneys in practice.” (Copyright 2012 by Woodward/White, Inc., of Aiken, SC).

Nine lawyers from Carlock, Copeland & Stair were recently selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2014 (Copyright 2012 by Woodward/White, Inc., of Aiken, SC). The following attorneys are to be congratulated for their Best Lawyer® recognition: Thomas S. Carlock, Best Lawyer® Since 1991 Commercial Litigation, Medical Malpractice Law, Personal Injury Litigation (Atlanta, GA) Kent T. Stair, Best Lawyer® Since 2006 Construction Law, Legal Malpractice Law (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC) Fred M. Valz, III, Best Lawyer® Since 2013 Insurance Law (Atlanta, GA) Johannes S. Kingma, Best Lawyer® Since 2009 Legal Malpractice Law (Atlanta, GA) D. Gary Lovell, Jr., Best Lawyer® Since 2013 Personal Injury Litigation (Atlanta, GA; Charleston, SC)

Seven lawyers from Carlock, Copeland & Stair were recently selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2013 (Copyright 2012 by Woodward/White, Inc., of Aiken, SC). In addition, firm founder Thomas S. Carlock was named a Best Lawyer® for the eleventh year in a row as well as the 2013 “Lawyer of the Year” in the Atlanta Personal Injury Litigation category. Carlock has practiced in the civil trial arena in Georgia for 46 years and during that time has tried more than 500 jury trials. Throughout his career, Tom has handled a wide variety of civil litigation including medical malpractice, catastrophic injury including wrongful death, coverage disputes, and every other type of civil lawsuit imaginable. He has tried, to verdict, in excess of 75 wrongful death cases and more than 150 catastrophic injury cases. His skill and leadership have helped the firm to continue to grow from five attorneys to 89, many of which have been honored as well for their skill and commitment to the legal profession. The following Carlock, Copeland & Stair attorneys are to be congratulated for their Best Lawyer® recognition: Thomas S. Carlock, Best Lawyer® Since 1991 Commercial Litigation, Medical Malpractice Law, Personal Injury Litigation (Atlanta, GA) Kent T. Stair, Best Lawyer® Since 2006 Construction Law, Legal Malpractice Law (Atlanta, GA) Wayne D. McGrew, III, Best Lawyer® Since 2008 Personal Injury Litigation (Atlanta, GA) Fred M. Valz, III, Best Lawyer® Since 2013 Insurance Law (Atlanta, GA) Johannes S. Kingma, Best Lawyer® Since 2009 Legal Malpractice Law (Atlanta, GA) D. Gary Lovell, Jr., Best Lawyer® Since 2013 Personal Injury Litigation (Atlanta, GA) About Best Lawyers Since it was first published in 1983, Best Lawyers has become universally regarded as the definitive guide to legal excellence. Because Best Lawyers is based on an exhaustive peer-review survey in which more than 36,000 leading attorneys cast almost 4.4 million votes on the legal abilities of other lawyers in their practice areas, and because lawyers are not required or allowed to pay a fee to be listed, inclusion in Best Lawyers is considered a singular honor. Corporate Counsel magazine has called Best Lawyers “the most respected referral list of attorneys in practice.” Only a single lawyer in each practice area and designated metropolitan area is honored as a Best Lawyers' “Lawyer of the Year.” Lawyers being honored as “Lawyer of the Year” are selected based on particularly impressive voting averages received during the exhaustive peer-review assessments that Best Lawyers conducts with thousands of leading lawyers each year. Receiving this designation reflects the high level of respect a lawyer has earned among other leading lawyers in the same communities and the same practice areas for their abilities, their professionalism, and their integrity. (Copyright 2012 by Woodward/White, Inc., of Aiken, SC).

We are proud to announce that 14 of our lawyers have been selected for inclusion on the Georgia Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars lists for 2012. Super Lawyers Thomas S. Carlock Wade K. Copeland Kent T. Stair Douglas W. Smith David F. Root W. Dan McGrew Fred M. Valz, III Johannes S. Kingma D. Gary Lovell, Jr. Eric J. Frisch Only five percent of the lawyers in the state are named by Super Lawyers. The selections for this esteemed list are made by the research team at Super Lawyers, which is a service of the Thomson Reuters. Each year, the research team at Super Lawyersundertakes a rigorous multi-phase selection process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent evaluation of candidates by the attorney-led research staff, a peer review of candidates by practice area, and a good-standing and disciplinary check. Rising Stars Shannon M. Sprinkle Peter Werdesheim Heather H. Miller John L. Bunyan Rising Stars is a listing of exceptional lawyers who are 40 years of age or under, or who have been practicing for 10 years or less, and have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. Only 2.5 percent of the total lawyers in the state are honored on the Rising Stars list.

We are pleased to announce that the Carlock, Copeland & Stair Insurance Coverage Corner blog has been selected as a LexisNexis Top Blog for Insurance Law - 2011. The Insurance Coverage Corner focuses on legal updates, opinions and other relevant information for Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Litigation. Please subscribe to the Insurance Coverage Corner blog for the latest updates.

We are proud to announce that 15 of our attorneys have been selected for inclusion on the Georgia Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars lists for 2011. Super Lawyers Honorees Thomas S. Carlock Wade K. Copeland Kent T. Stair Douglas W. Smith David F. Root W. Dan McGrew Fred M. Valz, III Johannes S. Kingma D. Gary Lovell, Jr. Eric J. Frisch Only five percent of the lawyers in the state are named by Super Lawyers. The selections for this esteemed list are made by the research team at Super Lawyers, which is a service of the Thomson Reuters, Legal division based in Eagan, MN. Each year, the research team at Super Lawyers undertakes a rigorous multi-phase selection process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent evaluation of candidates by the attorney-led research staff, a peer review of candidates by practice area, and a good-standing and disciplinary check. Rising Stars Honorees Shannon M. Sprinkle Peter Werdesheim Heather H. Miller Spencer A. Bomar Ryan B. Wilhelm Rising Stars is a listing of exceptional lawyers who are 40 years or under, or who have been practicing for 10 years or less and have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. Only 2.5 percent of the total lawyers in the state are honored on the Rising Stars list.

We are proud to announce that 15 of our attorneys have been selected for inclusion on the Georgia Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars lists for 2010. Super Lawyers Honorees Thomas S. Carlock Wade K. Copeland Kent T. Stair Douglas W. Smith David F. Root W. Dan McGrew Fred M. Valz, III Johannes S. Kingma D. Gary Lovell, Jr. Eric J. Frisch Only five percent of the lawyers in the state are named by Super Lawyers. The selections for this esteemed list are made by the research team at Super Lawyers, which is a service of the Thomson Reuters, Legal division based in Eagan, MN. Each year, the research team at Super Lawyers undertakes a rigorous multi-phase selection process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent evaluation of candidates by the attorney-led research staff, a peer review of candidates by practice area, and a good-standing and disciplinary check. Rising Stars Honorees Shannon M. Sprinkle John C. Rogers Pete Werdesheim Ryan B. Wilhelm Rising Stars is a listing of exceptional lawyers who are 40 years or under, or who have been practicing for 10 years or less and have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. Only 2.5 percent of the total lawyers in the state are honored on the Rising Stars list.

Does the Insurer Still Have Any Rights? The Interplay of Time-Limited Demands, Coverage Decisions, and Pursuit of Legitimate Fraud Investigations: In the age of prolific Holt and Tiger River Demands, does the insurer effectively have the right to investigate, evaluate and defend a cause of action? This topic explores the use and misuse of policy limits demand and the increased pressure on the insurer and defense counsel to simply receive the demand and issue a check. What are the best strategies for effectively combating these developments to allow a restful night sleep? Presenters/Co-Authors: Fred Valz, Melissa Bailey and Alex Davis. For more information on this program, please contact Michelle Mattox at mmattox@cskl.law

Fred Valz and Melissa Bailey presented New Technology, Old Policies: Are Aging Policies Equipped to Handle the Consumer Technology Book? at Carlock, Copeland & Stair’s Annual Insurance Coverage & Bad Faith Seminar on August 24 at the Atlanta Botanical Garden. Please contact Michelle Mattox at mmattox@cskl.law if you would like our attorneys to present in-house lunch & learn sessions or webinars.

Fred Valz co-presented “Plaintiff and Defense Perspectives”, as part of a number of sessions in The Seminar Group’s  Bad Faith Claims: Extra-contractual Liability in Georgia seminar, held in Atlanta on Thursday, February 5th and Friday, February 6th, 2015.

Fred Valz discussed emerging issues in insurance coverage in Georgia and South Carolina related to both personal and commercial lines at the Firm's Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Seminar. They also discussed some common and not-so-common bad faith traps, including tips for recognizing them and practical recommendations on how they can be avoided.

Charlie McDaniel and Fred Valz presented at the Firm's Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith seminar.

This presentation provided an overview of the differences between commercial auto policies and other types of insurance policies, as well as educate on different aspects of trucking policies. The speakers also discussed regulatory filings necessary for commercial operation and explore complexities of state and federal filings. This presentation was given by Fred Valz, Gary Lovell, Erica Holzman and Beth Albright, at the Firm's Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Seminar.

Fred Valz and Kathy Carlsten presented “Recent Developments in Bad Faith” at the Carlock, Copeland & Stair Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Seminar September 19, 2013 at the Atlanta Botanical Garden.

Fred Valz presented Unique and Evolving Issues in Excess and Umbrella Insurance Coverage at the Carlock, Copeland & Stair Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith Seminar September 19, 2013 at the Atlanta Botanical Garden.

Fred Valz presented “Recent Updates in Third Party Bad Faith in Georgia” at the Carlock, Copeland & Stair Fifth Annual General Liability & Workers’ Compensation Seminar June 20, 2013 at Turner Field.

"We don’t have a settlement? Utilizing recent appellate court decisions to provide practical solutions for preventing bad faith."Fred Valz. General Liability and Workers' Compensation Seminar. June 26, 2012. Atlanta, GA.

"Recent Developments in Third-Party Bad Faith and Reservation of Rights/Duty to Defend." Fred Valz. General Liability and Workers' Compensation Seminar. June 22, 2011. Atlanta, GA.

Fred Valz, Heather Miller, and Lee Weatherly co-presented "Significant Developments in Georgia and South Carolina Law" at the General Liability and Workers' Compensation Seminar hosted by Carlock, Copeland & Stair, LLP on June 22, 2011.

Tom Carlock and Fred Valz co-presented "The Evolution of Litigation Since Tort Reform of 2005" at the General Liability and Workers' Compensation Seminar hosted by Carlock, Copeland & Stair, LLP on June 17, 2010.

"When are Cases Winners of Losers? And Jury's Reaction to Your Case." Fred M. Valz. Carlock Copeland General Liability Seminar. September 16, 2009.

"Can Plaintiffs’ Attorneys Designate Settlement Proceeds as Pain and Suffering to Circumvent Claims for Medicaid Reimbursement in Georgia?" Fred Valz and Liza Carter. Calendar Call. Spring 2008.

"Recent Developments in Insurance Law in Georgia." Fred Valz and D. Gary Lovell, Jr. Atlanta, GA. 1997, 1993, 1992.

"Avoiding Bad Faith in Georgia, South Carolina and Alabama." Fred Valz. Atlanta, GA. 2006, 2005.

"Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Law in Georgia." Fred Valz. Atlanta, GA. 2006.

"Bad Faith, Medical Liens and Other Related Issues in Georgia." Fred Valz. Atlanta, GA. 2003, 1999.

"Settlement Issues." Fred Valz. Atlanta Claims Association. Atlanta, GA. November 2002.

"Lien Considerations in Georgia." Fred Valz. Atlanta, GA. January 31, 2001.

"Settlement Issues." Fred Valz. Adjusting the Automobile Injury Claim in Georgia. Atlanta, GA. October 26, 2000.

"Consumer Protection Issues." Fred Valz. Adjusting the Automobile Injury Claim in Georgia. Atlanta, GA. October 26, 2000.

"Bad Faith/Extra Contractual Liability." Fred Valz. Recent Developments in Georgia Insurance Law. Atlanta, GA. March 29, 2000.

"Extra Contractual Liability." Fred Valz. Insurance Coverage Law in Georgia. Atlanta, GA. January 2000.

"Litigating the Insurance Coverage Claim." Fred Valz. Insurance Coverage Law in Georgia. Atlanta, GA. January 2000

"Hot Topics in Coverage." Fred Valz, Kevin J. Bahr, & Edward R. Still. Insurance Coverage Law in Georgia. Atlanta, GA. January 2000.

"Recent Developments in PIP and U.M. in Georgia." Fred Valz. Atlanta, GA. February 1991, February 1990.

"Trial of the Case - Part 1." Fred Valz, James Weston and Amy H. Ferguson. Trying the Automobile Injury Case in Georgia. Atlanta, GA. January 1999.

"Ethical Considerations." Fred Valz and Bradley W. Grout. Trying the Automobile Injury Case in Georgia. Atlanta, GA. January 1999.

"Basic Issues in Georgia Tort Law." Fred Valz. Atlanta, GA. 1998.

"Georgia Tort and Motor Carrier Law Overview." Fred Valz and D. Gary Lovell, Jr. Atlanta, GA.