We have multiple attorneys with many years of significant insurance coverage experience interpreting all types and personal lines and business policies. Many of our insurance company clients rely on us to provide coverage opinions and advice in responding to coverage claims. We regularly file Declaratory Judgment Actions on coverage issues and defend garnishment actions seeking the payment of settlements or judgments against insurance companies. When Bad Faith or Vexatious Refusal Claims are filed because of coverage disputes, we defend those too. We have helped our clients rewrite sections of their insurance policies and reviewed policy forms for conformity to Missouri law. We have drafted Self Insurance Plans for State and Municipal Governmental agencies. We advise corporate clients on insurance issues including fitting insurance programs to their unique needs.

The appellate court reporters in Missouri are filled with important insurance coverage opinions that were presented to the courts by our attorneys, including:

• Toumayan v. State Farm General Insurance Company, 970 S.W.2d 822
  (language in policy was sufficient to contract out of the Efficient Proximate Cause Doctrine and earth movement exclusion barred coverage.)
• Lamkin v. Kelly, 771 S.W.2d 953
  (Insurance broker was not agent who could bind insurance company to a claim that insured was promised "full coverage".)
• State Farm Fire & Casualty Company v. D.T.S., 867 S.W.2d 642
  (Intent to harm is inferred in child molestation action so that expected or intended injury exclusion applies.)
• Browning v. GuideOne Specialty Insurance Company, 341 S.W.3d 897
  (Underinsured Motorist Coverage is not read into policy like Uninsured Motorist coverage.)
• Missouri Employers Mutual Insurance Company v. Nichols, 149 S.W.3d 617
  (Employers' Liability insurance covers only named insureds and not co-employees.)
• Hempen v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 687 S.W.2d 894
  (Can't stack med pay coverages under multiple policies.)