An Attorney Welcomes Hate Mail (in Style)
This attorney-authored article is from an upcoming issue of Mealey’s Litigation Report. It’s written by Randy J. Maniloff, a partner at the Philadelphia firm of White and Williams LLP. And it’s a fine example of an attorney-authored article written in style.
Here’s the intro:
It is a rare day that a court is called upon to address the availability of insurance coverage for a claim for alienation of affections. But in 2007, this solar eclipse of a coverage issue saw the light not just once, but twice.
If you don’t think that’s a long shot, then how about this — both decisions came from South Dakota (the state’s supreme court and the Eighth Circuit applying South Dakota law). Those are Powerball odds.
And I thought the only thing that people in South Dakota did for fun was visit Mt. Rushmore. [South Dakotans — You can send hate mail to Maniloffr@whiteandwilliams.com.]
A bit more engaging than the typical attorney-authored article, is it not?
Like most attorney-authored articles, a professional editor* never touched this, and it shows. Consider the following:
Additional insureds have frequently found themselves fighting to shed their Rodney Dangerfield status, arguing that they are “insureds” just as if their name appeared on the declarations page. Last year the Montana Supreme Court (as well as the Fifth Circuit) did just that, and then some.
The court did what? (This is known as throwing readers a curve — leaving them guessing what the author meant. When the author is an attorney, these curves are danger signs; i.e., they suggest the author has difficulty expressing himself clearly.)
According to the article, the court did this:
However, the Montana Supreme Court agreed with the interpretation advanced by additional insured Swank, that the definition of “you” and “your” did not apply to it — at least it concluded that the policy was ambiguous.
The court agreed. That’s what it did.
More evidence that a skilled and experienced editor never touched this article is found in these excerpts:
And the large number of asbestos defendants that have declared bankruptcy stand as a warning to companies that are unable to satisfy it.
Insureds sometimes do not seek coverage as an additional insured until late in the game, or at all, if their own insurer is defending them.
Coverage disputes involving excess insurers come in two general types — First, just as in the case of primary policies, issues arise whether a particular loss is covered under the terms of the excess policy.
The second type are cases where the coverage question itself is not in dispute, but, rather, the relationship between the primary and excess insurers, and how their policies should interreact, is tested.
The trial court issued a case management order which directed the Archdiocese to turn over copies of all insurance policies that might provide coverage for the underlying plaintiff s’ claims.
The complaint is tendered to the insurer, who is now confronted with the question whether it is obligated to provide a defense to its insured.
At the time of the fire, Trybulec lived with his parents, who had a homeowners’ insurance policy with Farm Bureau which carried a $100,000 personal liability limit.
Well, things have been slower-going than I thought.
And that body of cases I mentioned — Twiggy size — two.
Can you spot the error in each of those excerpts? If not, you might want to have a professional editor review the next article you write.
____________
*However, another attorney — one who served as a managing editor of a law journal — did serve as copy editor for this article. I find that a bit incredible. How could a managing editor not spot these errors?
