Fire – contractor
$11,200,000 recovery
Fire - contractor — $11,200,000 recovery
In what is unquestionably the most tragic case handled by RHLO, the historic Trinity Lutheran Church in Milwaukee was gutted by fire when a roofing contractor was grinding the metal gutter off the building, and allowed sparks to ignite the roof decking. RHLO not only recovered the substantial uninsured damages for Trinity, but provided substantial pro bono services to assist in the rebuilding of this magnificent building. RHLO recovered $11,200,000 for Trinity Lutheran Church.
Expert retained: Certified fire investigator.
Fire – negligence
$962,500 recovery
Fire - negligence - $962,500 recovery
In a case in which everything that could go wrong did, the owner of a condominium unit in an eight unit building hired a company to clean her dryer vent. The company used a van with a compressor to blow out the vent. The compressor was in ill-repair notwithstanding the fact that it had been serviced by several companies in the six-months preceding the fire. The compressor started on fire. The fire spread to the van, and then to the condominium building, resulting in substantial damages to the building.The subrogated insurers recovered $962,500.
Experts retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer, mechanical engineer.
Fire – negligence
$1,200,000 recovery
Fire - negligence - $1,200,000 recovery
A neighbor’s adult son came to the neighbor’s house, cut down a dead tree and decided to burn it in the insured’s fire pit. After the son built a large fire in the pit, he returned to the neighbor’s house to continue cutting up the tree. The size of the fire caused large embers to blow into the air. Very strong winds carried the embers to the insured’s shake roof where they ignited the roof. While the son’s insurer offered limits ($500,000 – less than half of the total recoverable damages), the neighbor’s insurer denied the claim on the basis that the neigbor (the father) was not even home and did not control the actions of his son. Suit was filed, and after motions were filed, the federal court ruled that the father was vicariously liable. The case settled, and the subrogated insurer recovered a total of $1,200,000.
Experts retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer.
Fire – defective dehumidifier
$3.46 Billion Jury Verdict
Fire - defective dehumidifier - $3.46 Billion Jury Verdict
The product defect case was tried to a jury. It found that a dehumidifier manufactured by the defendant was defective and caused the fire. It awarded $659,927.97 in compensatory damages, and $3,461,560,000 in punitive damages for the defendant’s intentional disregard of the plaintiff’s rights.
Experts retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer.
Fire – defective range
$450,000 recovery
Fire - defective range — $450,000 recovery
A 12 year old built-in range caused a fire to the adjacent wall when it was used the first time after being serviced by a company that had gone out-of-business. After conducting a joint scene exam and a lab exam, the retained experts confirmed that the cause of the fire was a defect in the design of the range. The range manufacturer (General Electric) initially denied the claim. However, after suit was filed, the parties quickly reached a settlement of $450,000.
Experts retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer.
Negligent structural engineering
$780,000 recovery
Negligent structural engineering — $780,000 recovery
The insured hired a structural engineer to design a cattle barn. Less than 30 days after construction, the barn collapsed. An intensive investigation into the remains of the structure revealed serious deficiencies in the design caused by inadequate structural engineering calculations.
Expert retained: structural engineer.
Fire – defective product
$500,000 recovery
Fire - defective product — $500,000 recovery
RHLO represented the insurer of a school district that sustained a substantial loss when a fan being used by a carpet cleaning vendor spontaneously combusted. While the cause of the fire was determined after the scene and lab exams, the dispute remained over who was responsible: the fan manufacturer, the company that had replaced the power cord, or the company that owned it and had been using it for a year after the last service.
Litigation ensured, and after all of the experts had been deposed, the case settled, and RHLO recovered $500,000 for its client.
Experts retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer, materials engineer.
Fire – dehumidifier
$732,007.32 recovery
Fire - defective dehumidifier — $732,007.32 recovery
A defective dehumidifier spontaneously combusted. While the fire damage was limited, the burning plastic of the of the dehumidifier body generated a substantial amount of smoke, filling the entire house with soot. RHLO recovered $732,007.32 for its client.
Experts retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer.
Fire – product liability
$625,000 recovery
Fire - product liability — $625,000 recovery
A lamp spontaneously combusted, causing a fire that destroyed the insured’s house. A very technical and extensive investigation revealed the point of the fire’s origin was on the circuit board in the power switch. The power cord had not been properly soldered to the board, resulting in the connection over-heating. RHLO recovered $625,000 for its client.
Experts retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer, materials engineer.
Fire – negligent oil change
$600,000 recovery
Fire - negligent oil change - $600,000 recovery
In this Oregon loss, the insureds had an oil change performed at their vehicle’s dealership. The dealership employee failed to properly replace the fill cap. As a result, on the drive home, oil sprayed out of the engine and onto hot engine surfaces. The
insured parked the car in the garage and went into the house. The splattered oil ignited, with the fire spreading to the house, causing substantial damage.
Experts retained: Certified vehicle fire investigator, electrical engineer.
Fire – smoker
$415,769 recovery
Fire - negligent smoker — $415,769 recovery
The insured owned a retail multi-unit building. A fire mysteriously started at the end of the building. A comprehensive investigation located a security camera on a neighboring property. When the video was analyzed after sophisticated software enhancement, the cause of the fire became apparent: an employee of one of the tenants negligently disposed a cigarette in a garbage can. RHLO recovered $415,769 for its client.
Experts retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer, video software enhancement consultant.
Fire – smoker
$400,000 recovery
Fire - smoker— $400,000 recovery
A tenant in an eight-unit apartment building negligently disposed of her cigarette on the balcony of her apartment. The fire quickly spread up the wall of the building and into the attic. Of note, the fire breached the fire wall in the attic, resulting in significantly more damage than if the fire wall had held. RHLO represented four insurers. The tenant’s liability insured paid policy limits. A claim then was pursued against the general contractor who built the attic fire stop in volition of applicable code for the damages caused by the excessive spread of the fire. RHLO recovered $400,000 for its clients.
Experts retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer, architect, computer animation expert.
Fire – contractor
$11,200,000 recovery
Fire - contractor — $11,200,000 recovery
In what is unquestionably the most tragic case handled by RHLO, the historic Trinity Lutheran Church in Milwaukee was gutted by fire when a roofing contractor was grinding the metal gutter off the building, and allowed sparks to ignite the roof decking. RHLO not only recovered the substantial uninsured damages for Trinity, but provided substantial pro bono services to assist in the rebuilding of this magnificent building. RHLO recovered $11,200,000 for Trinity Lutheran Church.
Expert retained: Certified fire investigator.
Fire – negligence
$962,500 recovery
Fire - negligence $962,500 recovery
In a case in which everything that could go wrong did, the owner of a condominium unit in an eight unit building hired a company to clean her dryer vent. The company used a van with a compressor to blow out the vent. The compressor was in ill-repair notwithstanding the fact that it had been serviced by several companies in the six-months preceding the fire. The compressor started on fire. The fire spread to the van, and then to the condominium building, resulting in substantial damages to the building.The subrogated insurers recovered $962,500.
Expert retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer, mechanical engineer.
Fire – negligence
$1,200,000 recovery
Fire - negligence - $1,200,000 recovery
A neighbor’s adult son came to the neighbor’s house, cut down a dead tree and decided to burn it in the insured’s fire pit. After the son built a large fire in the pit, he returned to the neighbor’s house to continue cutting up the tree. The size of the fire caused large embers to blow into the air. Very strong winds carried the embers to the insured’s shake roof where they ignited the roof. While the son’s insurer offered limits ($500,000 – less than half of the total recoverable damages), the neighbor’s insurer denied the claim on the basis that the neigbor (the father) was not even home and did not control the actions of his son. Suit was filed, and after motions were filed, the federal court ruled that the father was vicariously liable. The case settled, and the subrogated insurer recovered a total of $1,200,000.
Experts retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer.
Fire – defective dehumidifier
$3.46 Billion Jury Verdict
Fire - defective dehumidifier - $3.46 Billion Jury Verdict
The product defect case was tried to a jury. It found that a dehumidifier manufactured by the defendant was defective and caused the fire. It awarded $659,927.97 in compensatory damages, and $3,461,560,000 in punitive damages for the defendant’s intentional disregard of the plaintiff’s rights.
Experts retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer.
Fire – defective range
$450,000 recovery
Fire - defective range — $450,000 recovery
A 12 year old built-in range caused a fire to the adjacent wall when it was used the first time after being serviced by a company that had gone out-of-business. After conducting a joint scene exam and a lab exam, the retained experts confirmed that the cause of the fire was a defect in the design of the range. The range manufacturer (General Electric) initially denied the claim. However, after suit was filed, the parties quickly reached a settlement of $450,000.
Experts retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer.
Negligent structural engineering
$780,000 recovery
Negligent structural engineering — $780,000 recovery
The insured hired a structural engineer to design a cattle barn. Less than 30 days after construction, the barn collapsed. An intensive investigation into the remains of the structure revealed serious deficiencies in the design caused by inadequate structural engineering calculations.
Expert retained: structural engineer.
Fire – defective product
$500,000 recovery
Fire - defective product — $500,000 recovery
RHLO represented the insurer of a school district that sustained a substantial loss when a fan being used by a carpet cleaning vendor spontaneously combusted. While the cause of the fire was determined after the scene and lab exams, the dispute remained over who was responsible: the fan manufacturer, the company that had replaced the power cord, or the company that owned it and had been using it for a year after the last service.
Litigation ensured, and after all of the experts had been deposed, the case settled, and RHLO recovered $500,000 for its client.
Experts retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer, materials engineer.
Fire – dehumidifier
$732,007.32 recovery
Fire - defective dehumidifier — $732,007.32 recovery
A defective dehumidifier spontaneously combusted. While the fire damage was limited, the burning plastic of the of the dehumidifier body generated a substantial amount of smoke, filling the entire house with soot. RHLO recovered $732,007.32 for its client
Expert retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer.
Fire – product liability
$625,000.00 recovery
Fire - product liability — $625,000.00 recovery
A lamp spontaneously combusted, causing a fire that destroyed the insured’s house. A very technical and extensive investigation revealed the point of the fire’s origin was on the circuit board in the power switch. The power cord had not been properly soldered to the board, resulting in the connection over-heating. RHLO recovered $625,000 for its client.
Expert retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer, materials engineer.
Fire – negligent oil change
$600,000 recovery
Fire - negligent oil change - $600,000 recovery
In this Oregon loss, the insureds had an oil change performed at their vehicle’s dealership. The dealership employee failed to properly replace the fill cap. As a result, on the drive home, oil sprayed out of the engine and onto hot engine surfaces. The
insured parked the car in the garage and went into the house. The splattered oil ignited, with the fire spreading to the house, causing substantial damage.
Experts retained: Certified vehicle fire investigator, electrical engineer.
Fire – smoker
$415,769 recovery
Fire - negligent smoker — $415,769 recovery
The insured owned a retail multi-unit building. A fire mysteriously started at the end of the building. A comprehensive investigation located a security camera on a neighboring property. When the video was analyzed after sophisticated software enhancement, the cause of the fire became apparent: an employee of one of the tenants negligently disposed a cigarette in a garbage can. RHLO recovered $415,769 for its client.
Expert retained: Certified fire investigator, electrical engineer, video software enhancement consultant.
Fire – smoker
$400,000 recovery
Fire - smoker— $400,000 recovery
A tenant in an eight-unit apartment building negligently disposed of her cigarette on the balcony of her apartment. The fire quickly spread up the wall of the building and into the attic. Of note, the fire breached the fire wall in the attic, resulting in significantly more damage than if the fire wall had held. RHLO represented four insurers. The tenant’s liability insured paid policy limits. A claim then was pursued against the general contractor who built the attic fire stop in volition of applicable code for the damages caused by the excessive spread of the fire. RHLO recovered $400,000 for its clients.