(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...1 views
Updated: October 16th, 2020 | Fort Lauderdale | Lawyer List J | Kaufman Dolowich & Voluck LLP | Civil Litigation, Civil Rights, Construction, Insurance,
The current rating on Joseph Richard Miele is
(No Ratings Yet)Loading...And receives 1 page views
Address: 100 SE 3rd Avenue, Suite 1500, fort-lauderdale, FL, 33394
Law Firm: Kaufman Dolowich & Voluck, LLP
Phone: (954) 712-7472
Fax: 888-464-7982
Email:
Website: http://www.kdvlaw.com
| Title | Partner |
| First Year of Call | |
| Areas of Practice | Civil Litigation, Civil Rights, Construction, Insurance |
| Description | Joseph Miele concentrates his practice in the representation of insurers and insureds. He represents insurers in all aspects of complex insurance coverage and bad faith litigation. Mr. Miele has a broad range of experience in representing insureds in liability matters involving employment issues, construction defects, environmental and toxic torts, professional malpractice and directors’ and officers’ liability. Mr. Miele has represented many primary and excess insurers against both Fortune 500 companies and individuals. He has handled hundreds of these cases in Florida, New York and New Jersey, and successfully resolved multimillion-dollar coverage and bad faith actions. Mr. Miele also represents insurers in Department of Insurance investigations. He counsels insurers on proper claim handling, reviews and drafts policy language and analyzes and suggests legislative reforms. Professional Background Mr. Miele joined Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP in October 2009. He began his legal career in 1991 as litigation counsel at American International Adjustment Company/AIG in New York. He entered private practice in New Jersey and New York in 1993, and relocated to Florida in 2000, continuing his representation of insureds and insurers. Representative Matters Some of Mr. Miele’s significant representative matters include: Defense verdict representing a co-primary insurer in multimillion-dollar construction defect coverage arbitration based on trigger of coverage. Successful appellate decision in a matter alleging age and marital status discrimination. Successfully argued that a workers’ compensation claimant does not have an individual right to sue the compensation carrier for his employer in breach of contract because he was not in privity of contract and had no contractual rights under the policy pursuant to the Workers’ Compensation Act. Successfully argued that a bad faith claim should be dismissed because of fatal flaws in the timing and content of the required Civil Remedy Notice of Insurer Violation. Successfully argued that a ‘line item’ form of award was properly used in appraising a $10 million condominium hurricane loss. Successfully argued that ‘additional coverage extensions’ did not apply where allegation was that disgruntled employee poured muriatic acid down a drain system in an apartment complex, leading to significant corrosion and leakage of the drain system. Successfully argued that damage caused on an insured’s disposal of waste product was barred by pollution exclusion and was not an occurrence. Successfully argued that an insured which sold its contaminated waste stream as a ‘product’ was barred from recovery for clean up costs pursuant to a product exclusion in a liability policy. Successfully argued that strict liability imposed by environmental remediation statutes was akin to a judgment against the insured for purposes of triggering the statute of limitations. Successfully argued that extended PIP coverage did not apply to insured’s son because he was not a resident relative at the time of the accident and that PIP statute did not invalidate contrary policy provisions. Successfully argued that an attempt to join an independent insurance adjuster to a federal court action to destroy jurisdiction was a ‘fraudulent joinder’ such that the matter would not be remanded to state court. Successfully argued that ‘notice’ to an insurer was late as a matter of law despite insured’s claim that it did not believe the loss exceeded the deductible. Successfully argued that an attorney who suffered loss as a result of an Internet ‘scam’ where a check was dishonored did not qualify for ‘computer fraud’ coverage of ‘counterfeit coverage.’ Successfully argued than an insurer was entitled to commence its investigation anew when insured’s appraisal submission dramatically increased the damage claim for the first time during the appraisal process. Successfully argued that no cause of action against an insurer for ‘common law’ bad faith exists under Florida law. Presentations Mr. Miele has prepared and delivered many seminars on insurance coverage and bad faith law. Personal Joseph enjoys automobile restoration, modification and racing. He is also a performing musician. . |
Our seasoned litigators and legal practitioners place our clients first, think like business people, and provide our clients with viable and innovative solutions that offer them the best resolution possible.KDV is known for employment law and insurance coverage litigation and has expanded its practices to professional liability, construction, financial services, cyber security, maritime and shared economy. With over 100 attorneys and 9 of…
Garvin Law PLLC
David P. Cherundolo
Strout & Payson P.A.
Eric M. Martin Attorney
Patrick H. Tate P.A.
The Ted Kanner Law Office
Conliffe Sandmann & Sullivan
John R. Hakanson
Law Office of Julie Scott LLC
Bowman & Chamberlain LLC
The Siemon Law Firm
Beaver Courie Sternlicht Hearp & Broadfoot P.A.
Humbarger Zebell & Bieberich P.C.
Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP
Cicchetti Tansley & McGrath LLP
