Robert M. Horkovich is managing partner of Anderson Kill & Olick PC and chairman of the firm's insurance recovery group. He is a trial lawyer with experience trying complex insurance coverage actions on behalf of corporate policyholders.

Q: What is the most challenging case you have worked on and what made it challenging?

A: The jury trial of the Fuller-Austin case against Lloyd’s of London, Stonewall and Highlands over insurance coverage for asbestos liabilities. We won a trial court judgment in excess of $188 million (the ninth largest jury verdict in the United States that year) for the policyholder.

The case involved a four-month jury trial against very tenacious and skilled adversaries representing huge insurance institutions that threw armies of lawyers against us for months during the trial and for years preceding the trial. The jury trial and the intense negotiations leading to 14 separate settlements in excess of $190 million in insurance recoveries before trial with different insurance companies took everything out of me physically, mentally and emotionally for a couple of weeks after the verdict.

Q: What aspects of your practice area are in need of reform and why?

A: The U.S. domestic insurance insolvency system. In England, insurance insolvency proceedings regularly involve the input of creditors just like any U.S. domestic bankruptcy case. It is common for U.K. insurance insolvencies to result in payments to policyholders in excess of 90 percent of their claims.

In the U.S., there is no regular role for creditors or policyholders in domestic insurance insolvencies. They are run by the insurance companies and regulators commonly from the insurance industry. Policyholders usually only get pennies on the dollar in the U.S. unlike the U.K. One exception in the U.S. is the transit insolvency in which the court permitted a policyholder and creditors committee to participate. It was transparent. It was fast. And policyholders got over 78 percent of their claims paid.

We need to reform our U.S. insurance insolvency system, so policyholders have a formal role and get their claims paid in a higher percentage and faster.

Q: What is an important issue or case relevant to your practice area and why?

A: State of California v. Continental, in which the California Supreme Court decided two issues critically important to policyholders, which insurance policies respond to a policyholder’s loss and how much does each insurance policy pay toward the policyholder’s loss. The California Supreme Court decided all policies in effect at the time of the loss respond to the loss and that each policy pays “all sums” up to its policy limits until the policyholder’s loss fully is paid.

Other states will follow that California Supreme Court decision. Although that case involved insurance recoveries for environmental liabilities, it will be followed with regard to asbestos insurance recoveries and construction defect insurance recoveries. I am proud to serve Gov. Jerry Brown and Attorney General Kamala Harris as counsel in this case along with Lead Supervising Deputy Attorney General Darryl Doke, Deputy Attorney General Jill Scally, Roger Simpson and Dan Schultz.

Q: Outside your own firm, name an attorney in your field who has impressed you and explain why.

A: Larry Fox of Drinker Biddle in Philadelphia (when not teaching at Yale). He is one of the world’s greatest experts in legal ethics, especially regarding conflicts that other firms face when representing both policyholders and insurance companies in different cases — frequently without revealing the conflict to either client.

Larry is incredibly smart. He is uncompromising even when pressured and attacked. He can make simple what others make complex to attain personal gain. He conveys clear answers when presented with complex questions. He has enormous integrity and will convey the correct ethical answer even when the answer is very unpopular.

Q: What is a mistake you made early in your career and what did you learn from it?

A: When I was a young captain in the Air Force JAG Corp., one of some 200 trials I did was a prosecution before a United States magistrate judge of a colonel’s wife for shoplifting a pair of designer sunglasses from the Base Exchange.

Through my witnesses, I proved that she entered the Base Exchange, stalked the designer sunglass counter, selected exactly the expensive pair she coveted, took them, hid them and exited the Base Exchange without paying for them. My opposing counsel was a professor of criminal procedure at the University of Maryland. He waited patiently for me to close my case without saying a word. Then, he moved for a directed verdict in his client’s favor. The motion was granted immediately.

The United States magistrate judge explained that although my case was very compelling, I had failed to prove that element of the offense that the sunglasses in fact were the property of the Base Exchange. In the 30 years I have tried insurance recovery cases since then, I not only have started every insurance coverage trial with a very detailed checklist, I start every day with one. That case taught me more about attention to detail than anything else could.

The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the firm, its clients, or Portfolio Media Inc., or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.