After taking over the defense of a highly regarded commercial lawyer and his law firm as lead trial counsel less than a month before trial, David won a directed verdict following several days of trial. After successfully cross-examining the plaintiff, his nationally prominent law professor expert, and the defendant, David established the absence of any basis for a claim of professional negligence relating to a technical legal research issue and preservation of error for appellate review. The defendants obtained a substantial final judgment for attorneys’ fees and costs. (Broward County Circuit Court)

Successful defense of lawyer and major law firm at trial in suit for breach of trust, breach of fiduciary duty, and removal of lawyer as trustee, resulting in dismissal of claim for removal with prejudice and award of substantial attorneys’ fees and costs. (Polk County Circuit Court)

Prevailed on claims for legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty against a prominent commercial trial lawyer and his firm for alleged damages in excess of $200 million. (Complex Business Division, Orange County Circuit Court)

Successful prosecution of fee claim and defense of seven-figure counterclaim for breach of fiduciary duty, disgorgement of substantial fees, and damages in AAA arbitration for a major South Florida law firm. Fees in excess of $800,000 were recovered by the law firm client in the underlying commercial litigation case, with additional fees in excess of $750,000 for successful pursuit of fee claim and defense of counterclaim.

Successful defense of law firm in claim for negligence in guardianship proceedings and related sale of stock in closely held business, resulting in voluntary dismissal before jury selection at commencement of three-week jury trial. (Broward County Circuit Court)

Successfully defended large out-of-state law firm in claim alleging professional negligence associated with work on behalf of pension plan and IRS audit, and invalidation of the plan based on use of springing cash value life insurance policy funding mechanism sold to client by insurer and financial planners. The claimants voluntarily dismissed the case following receipt of summary judgment motion and agreed to pay fees to the law firm based on pending motions for sanctions pursuant to Florida Statute 57.105.

Successful defense of major South Florida law firm in two-week jury trial involving bankruptcy trustee auction and sale and the resulting claim for more than $1 million in damages awarded to the trustee against law firm’s former client; collected substantial fee award based on offer of judgment. 

After five years of contentious litigation, David prevailed after a week-long trial, before putting on a defense. David was initially engaged to represent the defendant’s counsel in connection with a routine real estate closing that should have ended with a corrective deed and corrected title insurance commitment after a mistake in the legal description came to light. Instead of submitting a title insurance claim, the buyer engaged a major AmLaw 200 firm and sued the seller (a bank that took title by foreclosure and previously sold off a small piece of the property it had acquired) for breach of contract based on an incorrect legal description. The buyer’s counsel had changed the legal description in the contract to correspond with the incorrect title commitment after it had been approved, without informing the seller, and denied knowledge of how the error in the legal description occurred. After an evidentiary dispute at trial regarding undisclosed information withheld based on privilege, the buyer produced emails proving that the buyers and their real estate counsel and title and closing agent knew of the discrepancy and the prior sale but failed to disclose it to the bank’s counsel. After this evidence was produced (and after making a settlement demand, which was rejected), the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case and agreed to relief on the counterclaim for reformation of the deed. The court reserved jurisdiction to award attorneys’ fees and costs to the bank. The case was resolved in a confidential settlement.

Defeated claims of malicious prosecution, tortious interference with business relationships, and conspiracy against corporation and its principals based on an unsuccessful criminal prosecution following insurance fraud investigation, with damages alleged in excess of $20 million and after court granted claimants leave to amend complaint to seek punitive damages. Total Fleet Solutions v. National Insurance Crime Bureau, Orange County Circuit Court Case No. 08-CA-33848-O, Summary Judgment Affirmed, 101 So. 3d 856 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)

In a two-week trial of a case taken over from prior counsel who retired, David and his team secured a defense verdict against an excess professional liability insurer seeking to avoid and shift responsibility to a previous excess insurer for its share of a $10 million settlement of a professional liability claim against a major law firm. The plaintiff insurer presented expert testimony from a nationally recognized authority on excess and surplus lines insurance coverage matters. The successful trial prevented recovery of more than $9 million. 

Successful pro bono representation of a dependent minor obtaining post-mortem invalidation of life insurance beneficiary designation by estranged parent and award of life insurance benefits to surviving minor dependent.

Represented insurer in a widely cited decision establishing distinction between insurance policy requirement of examinations under oath and depositions, resulting in forfeiture of claim based on insured’s failure to appear at an EUO. Goldman v. State Farm, 660 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). 

David's published appellate decisions include:

• Andreasen v. Klein, Glasser, Park & Lowe, P.L., 342 So. 3d 732 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)
• ARI Mut. Ins. Co. v. Hogen, 734 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
• Goldman v. State Farm Fire Gen. Ins. Co., 660 So. 2d 300 (4th DCA 1995)
• Sembric v. Allstate Ins. Co., 434 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
• Sparacino v. Laganiere, 429 So. 2d 1299 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)