Kirk C. Jenkins

jenkins_kirk_portKirk C. Jenkins chairs Sedgwick’s Appellate Task Force. Mr. Jenkins has maintained an exclusively appellate practice for the past twenty years, serving as lead appellate counsel in over 200 appeals and interlocutory petitions in state and Federal courts across the country.

Mr. Jenkins has successfully represented clients in complex litigation in a variety of industries, including public utilities; automotive; construction and mining equipment; food manufacturing; electronic components and pharmaceuticals.  He has litigated a broad range of issues, including Federal preemption; electrocution injuries; failure to warn and design defect; the admissibility of economic testimony; price-fixing and essential facilities; groundwater contamination; primary and exclusive administrative jurisdiction; alleged asbestos exposure; the extraterritorial application of Federal and state law, and the certification and decertification of consumer class actions.  He frequently writes for publication and is quoted by the press about emerging issues in appellate business litigation and the dynamics of appellate courts.

Practice Areas

  • Appellate Practice, concentrating in matters of:
    • Mass Tort
    • Automotive
    • Food Manufacturing
    • Heavy Equipment
    • Pharmaceutical
    • Environmental Law

Professional Associations

  • Selected for inclusion in Best Lawyers in America, 2010-2016 editions, field of appellate law
  • Selected for inclusion in Benchmark Appellate Litigation, 2012-2013 editions, as an Appellate Litigation Star in the Seventh Circuit
  • Fellow, California Academy of Appellate Lawyers (by election)
  • Member, American Law Institute (by election)
    • Members Consultative Group, Project on Sexual & Gender-Based Misconduct on Campus
    • Members Consultative Group, Restatement of the Law, Liability Insurance
    • Members Consultative Group, Restatement (Third): The U.S. Law of International Commercial Arbitration
    • Members Consultative Group, Restatement (Third) of Torts: Liability for Economic Loss
    • Members Consultative Group, Restatement (Third) of Torts: Intentional Torts to Persons

Education

  • Harvard Law School, J.D. 1986, cum laude
  • Harvard College, A.B. 1983, magna cum laude

Bar Admissions

  • Illinois
  • California
  • District of Columbia (inactive status)
  • United States Supreme Court
  • United States Courts of Appeals for the D.C., Federal, 2nd, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th Circuits

Peter C. Condron

condron_peter_portPeter C. Condron is a litigator who focuses his practice on toxic tort, product liability and commercial matters in both trial and appellate courts. He has defended major oil companies in product liability litigation, class action lawsuits and property damage claims arising from gasoline spills. He has represented corporate clients in various contract disputes, antitrust matters, arbitrations and other commercial litigation at both the trial court and appellate levels in federal and state courts. Mr. Condron represented several major oil companies in federal multidistrict gasoline litigation and a nationwide class action involving underground storage tanks. He obtained a defense verdict for a major gasoline refiner in a gasoline product liability action in a New York State court and successfully defended that verdict on appeal.  He is also defending various property damage and product liability litigation in federal and state courts nationwide.

Mr. Condron has represented major oil companies, natural gas companies and other corporate clients in successful contribution and cost-recovery litigation against insurers and other parties. He also counsels clients on non-litigation matters.

Practice Areas

·         Complex Litigation

·         Mass Torts

·         Product Liability

·         Environmental & Toxic Tort

·         Regulatory and Administrative Law

Professional Associations

·         American Bar Association, Co-Chair, Committee on Environmental Litigation and Toxic Torts

·         Maryland State Bar Association

Education

·         J.D. (1987) William and Mary School of Law

·         B.S. (1984) St. John’s University

Bar Admissions

·         District of Columbia

·         Maryland

·         New York

·         United States Courts of Appeals for the District of Columbia, 2nd, 7th and 9th Circuits

·         United States District Courts for the District of Columbia, District of Maryland and Eastern and Southern Districts of New York

Agelo L. Reppas

reppas_angelo_portAgelo L. Reppas concentrates her practice in all phases of civil appellate and post-trial litigation, protecting clients’ interests in state and federal jurisdictions across the nation. Ms. Reppas has a successful record of briefing and orally arguing appeals in a number of practice areas, including construction defect litigation, employment, fidelity and surety, insurance coverage, premises liability, professional liability and transportation litigation, among others.

Ms. Reppas also acts as monitoring appellate counsel at the trial level in high-exposure cases, partnering with trial attorneys in preparing pre-trial motions, motions in limine, motions for directed verdict, jury instructions and jury verdict forms; identifying and preserving errors for appeal; ensuring the record is complete; and preparing and arguing post-trial motions, all of which postures cases for successful resolution on appeal.

Representative Matters

  • Wash. Counties Risk Pool v. Clark Cty., No. 91154-1 (Wash. 2016) (defended a judgment that coverage under an occurrence-based policy for wrongful conviction claims was triggered when the claimants were convicted and imprisoned, not years later when they were exonerated).
  • Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London v. D.R. Horton L.A. Holding Co., Inc., No. G053316 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016) (challenged an order compelling disclosure to a claimant of an insurer/insured’s confidential settlement communications, which took place before the claimant attained judgment creditor status).
  • FHP Tectonics Corp. v. Am. Home Assurance Co., 57 N.E.3d 575 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016) (successfully obtained affirmance of a judgment that an insurer owed no duty to defend a purported additional insured, where a self-insured retention endorsement eliminated a duty to defend named or additional insureds).
  • Busch Props., Inc. v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 815 F.3d 1123 (8th Cir. 2016) (applying Missouri law) (successfully obtained affirmance of a judgment that an insurer had no duty to indemnify the insured’s purported settlement with third parties, where the insured was not legally obligated to make the payment as no claims or lawsuits had been filed against the insured).
  • Chiquita Brands Int’l, Inc. v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 57 N.E.3d 97 (Ohio Ct. App. 2015) (successfully obtained affirmance of a judgment of $13M in defense costs and prejudgment interest, which the insured was required to repay after reversal of the trial court’s erroneous duty to defend ruling).
  • Clemente v. N.J. Transit, No. A-002355-12T3, 2015 WL 7047513 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Nov. 12, 2015) (challenged judgment finding that general liability coverage applied to an automobile liability risk, and that self-insurance was not required to contribute to the loss).
  • Steel Supply & Eng’g Co. v. Ill. Nat’l Ins. Co., 620 F. App’x 442 (6th Cir. 2015) (successfully defended judgment for an insurer on the basis that the insured’s defective workmanship did not cause property damage).
  • First Health Settlement Class v. Chartis Spec. Ins. Co., 111 A.3d 993 (Del. 2015) (defended a judgment holding that statutory penalties are not covered damages under an excess liability policy).
  • Dish Network Corp. v. Arrowood Indem. Co., 772 F.3d 856 (10th Cir. 2014) (successfully defended judgment for an insurer declaring that it had no duty to defend or indemnify insureds in an underlying patent infringement action).
  • Lexington Ins. Co. v. St. Bernard Parish Gov’t, 548 F. App’x 176 (5th Cir. 2013) (challenged judgment finding an insurer owed coverage in connection with underlying inverse condemnation claims).
  • Silgan Containers, LLC v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 543 F. App’x 635 (9th Cir. 2013) (defended judgment for an insurer on the basis that the insured’s defective workmanship did not cause property damage).
  • Chiquita Brands Int’l, Inc. v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 988 N.E.2d 897 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013) (successfully obtained reversal of judgment for an insured, which had bankrolled Colombian terrorists, on the basis that the insured’s conduct was not accidental and the injury had occurred outside the policies’ coverage territory).
  • Granite State Ins. Co. v. Lodholtz, 981 N.E.2d 563 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (challenged denial of leave to intervene to seek vacatur of a default judgment entered against the insured).
  • Silgan Containers Corp. v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 434 F. App’x 709 (9th Cir. 2011) (successfully defended judgment for an insurer on the basis that the insured’s defective workmanship did not cause property damage).

Presentations and Publications

  • Presenter, “Appellate Pitfalls to Avoid When Presenting Your Coverage Case,” Chicago Bar Association (May 9, 2011).

Admissions

  • Illinois
  • New York

Education

  • J.D. (2000) Washington University School of Law
  • B.A. (1995) University of Iowa
  • B.S. (1995) University of Iowa

Memberships and Affiliations

  • Defense Research Institute
  • Hellenic Bar Association
  • New York State Bar Association

Douglas J. Collodel

collodel_doug_portLos Angeles-based attorney Douglas J. Collodel has broad experience working with major corporations and public entities, handling civil litigation matters in state and federal courts. He concentrates his practice on all aspects of appellate law, and has been certified by The State Bar of California Office of Legal Specialization as an Appellate Law Specialist.

Mr. Collodel has briefed and argued numerous cases involving, among other issues, healthcare matters, federal preemption issues, constitutional questions, civil rights violations, government tort claims, business torts, insurance coverage, and general liability disputes. He has participated in proceedings before the United States Supreme Court, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, California Supreme Court and California Court of Appeal, and has more than thirty published decisions.

Practice Areas

  • Healthcare
  • Constitutional Law
  • Product Liability

Professional Associations

  • Los Angeles County Bar Association (including Appellate Courts and Appellate Election Evaluations Committees)
  • Defense Research Institute (including Appellate Advocacy Committee)
  • Italian-American Lawyers Association (including service as president in 2000)
  • Notre Dame Monogram Club

Education

  • University of Notre Dame, A.B. (1980)
  • University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law, J.D. (1983)

Bar Admissions

  • California
  • U.S. Supreme Court
  • United States Courts of Appeals for the 9th and 10th Circuits
  • U.S. District Courts for the Central, Northern and Southern Districts

Hall R. Marston

marston_hall_portWith over 30 years of front-line litigation experience, Hall R. Marston brings a deep and diverse range of skills to the service of the firm’s clients. With over 100 appellate matters, 22 jury trials and more than 30 published opinions which have molded significant elements of the nation’s jurisprudence, Mr. Marston’s practice encompasses a broad sweep of general civil litigation, including products liability, professional liability and healthcare, employment, complex business litigation, corporate and partnership disputes, surety and insurance coverage disputes. As a Certified Appellate Specialist, by the California State Bar’s Board of Legal Specialization, Mr. Marston continues to help shape decisional authority in a wide array of practice areas.

From the outset of his practice to the present, Mr. Marston has had the privilege of participating in some of the major episodes of mass tort litigation regarding pharmaceuticals and medical devices. He has represented defendants in the diethylstilbestrol (“DES”), Dalkon Shield, DPT and polio vaccine, TMJ Teflon implant, Bendectin, and breast implant litigation. In this field, Mr. Marston has had perhaps the most impact in developing the law before the nation’s appellate courts in this challenging environment for manufacturers and distributors.

Mr. Marston has also represented the defense in mass tort litigation involving tobacco (including a published California appellate opinion on the controversial limitations/revival statute), asbestos, benzene exposure litigation, as well handling suits involving heavy machinery, hand held small tools, and environmental contamination. After preparing a summary judgment motion for a manufacturer of a wood-working table router on the grounds of post-sale modifications, the plaintiff accepted a settlement from Mr. Marston’s client of less than one tenth of further costs of defense.

Practice Areas

  • Appellate
  • Drug & Medical Device/Products Liability
  • Professional Liability
  • Healthcare
  • Commercial and Complex Litigation

Professional Associations

  • Certified Specialist in Appellate Law, The State Bar of California Office of Legal Specialization
  • Member of the Los Angeles County Bar Association, Appellate Courts Committee, and the America Business Trial Lawyers Association
  • Member of the Defense Research Institute
  • Voted by his peers, yearly since 2005 , as a “Southern California Super Lawyer,” Los Angeles Magazine

Education

  • J.D. (1977) UCLA School of Law
  • A.B. (1974) Occidental College, magna cum laude

Bar Admissions

  • California
  • United States Supreme Court
  • United States Courts of Appeals for the 1st, 2nd, 5th, 9th and 11th Circuits
  • United States District Courts for the Central, Northern, Eastern and Southern Districts

Robert C. Weill

weill_robert_portRobert C. Weill handles civil appeals in federal and state courts and provides litigation support to the firm’s trial attorneys.  He has briefed and/or argued cases involving a wide variety of issues before the Florida Supreme Court, the Florida District Courts of Appeal, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court.  He also prepares complex motions for summary judgment, detailed case analyses, and other miscellaneous pleadings involving considerable research and writing.

Mr. Weill is an AV-Preeminent Rated Lawyer and member of the Florida Bar’s Appellate Practice and Advocacy Section. He is also active in the Insurance Coverage & Amicus Curiae Committees of the Florida Defense Lawyer’s Association and the Appellate Practice Section of the Broward County Bar Association. Additionally, he is a member of the Defense Research Institute and is on the Editorial Board of Trial Advocate Quarterly.

During law school, he was a senior staff member of the Nova Law Review, academic editor of the Moot Court Society, and national member of the Order of Barristers. He received the honor of Best Brief in the Freshman Moot Court Competition, and he was a member of Phi Delta Phi, the National Legal Honor Society.

Presentations & Publications

  • “The Exhausting Task of Understanding Horizontal and Vertical Exhaustion,” Trial Advocate Quarterly (Winter 2011).
  • “Representative Depositions: In Search of a Cohesive & Well-Defined Body of Law,” Nova Law Review (Spring 2009).
  • “Buster and the Continuing Saga Over the Patients’ Right-to-Know-About-Medical Incidents-Amendment,” Trial Advocate Quarterly (Winter 2009).
  • “The Overlooked Arrow in the Defense’s Quiver: The Rule Against Impermissible Inference-Stacking,” Trial Advocate Quarterly (Summer 2007).
  • “A Primer on Contribution & Indemnity,” Trial Advocate Quarterly (Spring 2007).
  • “Amendment 7: Will the Patient’s Right to Know Come At Too High a Price?” Trial Advocate Quarterly (Spring 2005).
  • “Gone With the Windfall: Limiting Past Medical Expenses to Paid, Not Billed, Charges,” Trial Advocate Quarterly (Spring 2004).
  • “The Voluntary Payment Doctrine in Florida,” Trial Advocate Quarterly (Fall 2002).
  • “Multiple Claims Exceeding the Policy Limits,” Mealey’s Litigation Report-Insurance Bad Faith (August 17, 1999).
  • “Trends & Developments in Bad Faith Litigation,” BBP Insurance Defense Seminar (August 17, 1999).
  • Speaker, “An Effective Approach to Legal Writing & Research in Florida,” Lorman Education Services, Tampa, Florida (November 18, 1999).
  • Speaker, “Good Faith Claim Handling: Laforet & Powell,” Superior Insurance Company, Atlanta, Georgia (December 10, 1999).
  • “Does a Liability Insurer Have a Duty to Initiate Settlement Negotiations?” Mealey’s Litigation Report-Insurance Bad Faith (September 15 and October 20, 1998).
  • “Multiple Claims Exceeding the Policy Limits: How to Protect the Insured and Avoid Bad Faith Claims,” Mealey’s 1998 Bad Faith Conference (1998).
  • “Time Demand Letters: Identifying Problems & Avoiding Them,” Onyx Insurance Company 1998 Bad Faith Seminar (1998).

Practice Areas

  • Appellate

Education

  • Shephard Broad Law Center, Nova Southeastern University, J.D. 1994
  • Cornell University, B.A. 1990 Psychology

Bar Admissions

  • Florida
  • United States Supreme Court
  • United States Courts of Appeals, Third and Eleventh Circuits
  • United States District Courts, Southern, Middle and Northern Districts of Florida

Erin E. Dardis

dardis_erin_portErin E. Dardis is an attorney in the firm’s Miami office. She focuses on commercial and insurance litigation, medical malpractice defense, trial support, and appellate matters.

 

Practice Areas

  • Appellate

Professional Associations

  • Dade County Bar Association

Education

  • J.D. (1995) Syracuse University College of Law
  • B.A. (1992) Syracuse University

Bar Admissions

  • Florida
  • Connecticut
  • New York
  • New Jersey
  • Pennsylvania
  • Washington

Matthew A. Reed

reed_matthew_portMatthew A. Reed practices primarily in the area of product liability litigation, representing drug and medical device manufacturers in state and federal litigation across the country.  He also litigates complex business matters on behalf of clients in a variety of industries.  His recent efforts encompass a broad spectrum of motion and briefing practice, including post-trial and appellate work.

As the lead associate on the motion and briefing team for national coordinating counsel in multi-state medical products liability litigation, he has drafted successful motions for summary judgment, motions in limine, and trial briefs in state and federal courts around the nation.  He is familiar with state and federal complex litigation procedures, having contributed prevailing briefing in federal Multi-District Litigation (“MDL”) proceedings, as well as oppositions to consolidation in the state court context.  He also has experience managing local counsel’s motion work and case handling.

Mr. Reed has extensive experience challenging and defending expert witnesses, having drafted and opposed numerous Daubert motions and motions to strike against a diverse range of medical and regulatory experts.  His motions have secured the exclusion or limitation of key opposing experts in vanguard federal court litigation.  He has also worked with co-defense counsel to coordinate nationwide Daubert strategy.

As the lead associate on post-appeal, state trial court briefing, Mr. Reed drafted a successful motion for contractual attorney fees in the amount of $1.5 million, despite an appellate decision affirming judgment against his client on all causes of action except the contract claim.  The success of the motion provided the client the right to recoup an additional $1.3 million in attorney fees already paid to the opposing party.  He also drafted motions to amend the judgment and for restitution, which the client leveraged for a favorable settlement of associated litigation.

Mr. Reed also has federal and state court appellate experience. He has drafted the respondent’s brief to the 9th Circuit in an appeal from a district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of his client. He has also drafted the respondent’s brief and a motion to dismiss in an appeal from a state court trial verdict in favor of his client, a law firm.  The appellate court upheld the verdict in his client’s favor in its entirety, and the state supreme court denied petition for review.

Practice Areas

  • Appellate
  • Complex Litigation
  • Drug & Medical Device
  • Mass Torts
  • Products Liability

Education

  • Pepperdine University School of Law, J.D., 2005
  • Pepperdine University School of Public Policy, M.P.P., 2004
  • Azusa Pacific University, B.S., 1998

Bar Admissions

  • California
  • United States District Courts for the Central and Eastern Districts of California