Ashley Eiler

Prevailed on a motion for partial summary judgment on behalf of a federal employer relating to threshold exhaustion issue in Title VII employment discrimination case. Secured dismissal of an employment discrimination action brought under the Family Medical Leave Act on behalf of a federal agency. Prevailed on a motion to dismiss a medical malpractice action against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Obtained Fourth Circuit affirmance of favorable district court ruling that all claims against insured engineering firm arising from the collapse of two nearly identical bridges constituted “related claims” under architects and engineers professional liability policy and were subject to a single per claim limit of liability. Stewart Engineering v. Continental Cas. Co., 2018 WL 5832805, No. 18-1386 (4th Cir. Nov. 7, 2018). Obtained judgment on the pleadings confirming that a fee dispute against an insured attorney does not seek covered “damages” within the meaning of a lawyers professional liability policy. Cont’l Cas. Co. v. Parnoff, 2018 WL 4356746 (D. Conn. Sept. 12, 2018). Served on team that won a June 2016 jury trial relating to rescission of an accountants’ professional policy. Cont’l Cas. Co. v. Marshall Granger & Co., 921 F. Supp. 2d 111 (S.D.N.Y. 2013), 6 F. Supp. 3d 380 (S.D.N.Y. 2014). The Second Circuit affirmed the judgment for the insurer. Cont’l Cas. Co. v. Marshall Granger & Co., No. 16-2384, 2017 WL 2416902 (2d Cir. June 5, 2017). Obtained Fourth Circuit affirmance of district court decision determining that a lawsuit against the insured business entity related back to an earlier lawsuit filed prior to the inception of the insurer’s policy period. C. & A.N. Miller Development Co. v. Cont’l Cas. Co., 814 F.3d 171 (4th Cir. 2016).

In a win for Wiley Rein’s client, a federal district court applying Connecticut law has held that an insurer has no duty to defend or indemnify an attorney in a lawsuit that arose out of a fee dispute and did not seek any covered relief. Continental Cas. Co. v. Parnoff, 2018 WL 4356746 (D. Conn. Sept. 12, 2018).

Applying California law, a federal district court has held that a disciplinary proceeding initiated by a state insurance department against an insured life insurance agent is unambiguously subject to a regulatory action sublimit of liability. Cerf v. Cont’l Cas. Co., Case No. 17-cv-07993-DSF-SS (C.D. Cal. Mar. 13, 2018). Wiley Rein represented the insurer in this case.

Applying Arizona and New York law, an Arizona trial court has held that a claims-made-and-reported policy unambiguously does not apply where the insured failed to notify the insurer of a claim before the policy’s reporting deadline. Southwest Energy Systems LLC v. Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, Case No. 2017-015010 (Ariz. Super. Ct., Maricopa Cnty. Mar. 15, 2018). Wiley Rein represented the insurer in this case.

Applying California law, a federal district court has held that there is no coverage under a claims-made-and-reported policy for a legal malpractice suit that was filed two years after the expiration of the policy period and reported to the insurer two years later. Petersen v. Arch Ins. Co., 2015 WL 3968590 (C.D. Cal. June 30, 2015).

Applying Virginia law, a federal district court has held that there is no coverage under an employment practices liability policy where the insured failed to provide notice of an employment discrimination charge for nearly two years, in violation of the policy’s notice condition. E. Dillon & Co. v. Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. of Am., 2015 WL 3657713 (W.D.Va. June 12, 2015).