Any company or individual providing professional advice or acting as a service provider has concerns about Professional Liability/Errors and Omissions exposures. These concerns typically relate to liability or insurance coverage questions for claims alleging negligence in the performance of professional services, or for failing to render services that were agreed upon by contract. We have substantial experience providing litigation services for the following types of professionals:
- Financial Institution Professionals
- Insurance Brokers & Agents
- Investment Advisors
- Media Professionals
- Medical, Dental and Allied Health Care Professionals
- Miscellaneous Professionals Covered by E&O
- Pharmacy Professionals
- Real Estate Brokers & Agents
- Securities Dealers
- Social Service (Professionals)
Most organizations face liability and coverage issues arising from the day-to-management and oversight of their businesses. Principles, board members, and other top-level executives have a fiduciary obligation to their shareholders, limited partners and members to make sound business decisions and ensure that business is running smoothly. As we all know, sometimes claims of mismanagement arise requiring the need for a capable defense of corporate lawsuits. We provide experienced defense litigation for the following types of management personnel:
- Directors & Officers Liability (D&O)
- General Partnership Liability (GPL)
- Employment Practices Liability (EPLI)
- Outside Directorship Liability (ODL)
- Trustee Liability
- Independent Directors Liability
For more information about or Professional and Management Liability practice contact Tom Rice or Hal Meltzer at 816.471.2121.
News & Events
| Thomas Rice is serving as co-chair of the upcoming program ”Enlightening The EPL/PL World” jointly hosted by ALFA International’s Insurance Law, Labor & Employment, and Professional Liability Practice Groups. A Steering Committee Member of the Insurance Law, Professional Liability and Labor & Employment Practice Groups, Mr. Rice is serving as co-chair on behalf of the Insurance Practice Group...
| Thomas Rice will moderate a panel on cyber liability and data breaches in the workforce and related legal and ethical considerations for in-house counsel, corporate risk management and law firms. Panel members feature representatives from three different insurance companies with cyber liability expertise plus an attorney from ALFA International’s Los Angeles, California member firm...
| Thomas Rice is serving as course book editor for the insurance track of the upcoming program "Enlightening the EPL/PL World" jointly hosted by ALFA International's Insurance Law, Labor & Employment, and Professional Liability Practice Groups.
| BSCR attorney David Eisenberg is serving as the Course Book Editor for the 2012 ALFA International EPLI Seminar to be held in New York in June. The EPLI seminar is jointly sponsored by the Insurance, Labor & Employment and Professional Liability Practice Groups. . .
| Thomas Rice is the program co-chair for the June 2012 ALFA seminar to be jointly sponsored by the Insurance, Professional Liability and Labor & Employment practice groups.
| Tom Rice will be speaking at an upcoming Chartis in-house seminar to be held in New York on June 16. Tom's presentation will address "Avoiding Claims Against Officers and Directors".
| The United States Supreme Court ruled on May 22, 2017, that the Hague Convention, on the service of judicial documents abroad, permits service by mail if the receiving country has not objected to service by mail and service by mail is authorized under otherwise-applicable law.
| Earlier this week, Governor Eric Greitens signed Missouri HB 153 into law. HB 153, which supplants Missouri’s existing expert witness standard with that set forth in Federal Rules of Evidence 702, 703, 704 and 705, effectively submits expert testimony in most civil and criminal case to the analysis set forth in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
| Within a two-week period, two federal judges issued strongly worded orders denouncing the common practice of asserting boilerplate objections to written discovery.
| A Missouri plaintiff did not irrevocably waive the protections of the work product doctrine simply by designating an expert witness and then withdrawing the designation without disclosing the expert’s analysis or conclusions.
| If personal and subject matter jurisdiction are established, venue is proper in any county in Missouri in the absence of an express provision in RSMo § 508.010 restricting venue.
| While a Kansas court may grant relief from a final judgment based on excusable neglect, it is an abuse of discretion to grant that relief when the party seeking that relief has failed either to explain what facts constituted excusable neglect or to provide any evidence to support that claim.
| Experts are not required to rule out all possible causes when performing the differential etiology analysis if the experts have properly ruled in the alleged cause.
| A Kansas plaintiff may amend their pleadings to assert punitive damages up until the day of the pretrial conference.
| A man who sued his former employer, alleging he was discharged in retaliation for filing a workers' compensation claim, appealed on the basis that the trial court used a jury instruction with the wrong standard. In a 5-2 decision written by Judge George W. Draper III, the Missouri Supreme Court rejected the 'exclusive causation' standard and replaced it with the "contributing factor" standard. On remand and in future cases, the jury must determine whether the plaintiff's filing of a workers' compensation claim was a "contributing factor" to his or her discharge.
| Based on its adoption of a statutory scheme of comparative negligence, Kansas has abolished common law assumption of the risk as a bar to recovery. Simmons v. Porter, 298 Kan. 299, 312 P3d 345, 355 (Kan. 2013).
| The plaintiff has the burden of proving standing, which is a jurisdictional issue that can be raised at any time.
| In Kansas, the parties bind themselves to an enforceable settlement, even though the parties contemplate subsequent execution of a formal instrument. However, when the parties specifically condition a contract on it being reduced to writing and signed, there is no enforceable contract until such act is accomplished.