Joshua L. Blosveren, a partner of the firm, has represented domestic and international clients in a diverse range of complex business litigation matters, including insurance recovery for policyholders, business torts, FINRA arbitration, securities law, civil RICO, employment law, bankruptcy, environmental law, and the counseling of foreign and transnational clients on various regulatory and jurisdictional issues. Recognized by New York Super Lawyers – Metro Edition© as a 2016 “Rising Star” in insurance, he has successfully litigated and tried cases and argued appeals in numerous state and federal courts and arbitral forums.
In 2013, Mr. Blosveren was appointed by the Chief Judge of the State of New York, to the Commercial Division Advisory Council, a permanent group that advises the Chief Judge on an ongoing basis regarding all matters involving the Commercial Division of the State of New York and works to implement changes aimed at improving the courts of the Commercial Division. Mr. Blosveren serves as the Editor in Chief of the American Bar Association’s Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Law Journal. From 2012 to 2016, he served as its Co-Executive Editor. He is also Co-Chair of the Environmental Coverage Subcommittee of the Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee of the ABA’s Section of Litigation, a member of the Business Litigation and Dispute Resolution Committees of the ABA’s Tort Trial and Insurance Practice Section, and a member of the New York State Bar Association’s Committee on Courts of Appellate Jurisdiction.
In addition to the ABA and the NYSBA, he is a member of the Federal Bar Council and the New York City Bar Association. He is admitted to the Bar of the State of New York, the District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Prior to joining the firm, Mr. Blosveren was an associate in the litigation departments of Salans LLP (now Dentons) (from 2002 to 2005) and Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle LLP (from 2005 to 2008). Mr. Blosveren graduated from Cornell University’s College of Architecture, Art & Planning, with honors, in 1999, and from the New York University School of Law, where he was a member of the Moot Court Board’s Competitions Division, in 2002. While an undergraduate, he studied European History at the University of Oxford, St. Catherine’s College.
As set forth in a March 6, 2017 court decision, we defeated a summary judgment motion by over 20 insurance companies that sought to prevent our client from putting its case to the jury for insurance for alleged “property damage” over 26 years of insurance policies. The insurance claims are for defense and settlement costs in excess of $100 million incurred by our client in a nationwide class action product liability litigation (which was settled without any finding of liability), brought by community water systems alleging that our client’s herbicide product, applied for more than 60 years to neighboring cropland, contaminated their water systems. The insurers argued that our client could not prove that “property damage,” as defined in the policies, had occurred in all of the policy periods. We successfully persuaded the court that our client was entitled to present to the jury the expert scientific testimony of its chemical fate and transport expert for its determination whether the alleged “property damage” more likely than not occurred during the policy periods at issue. The court agreed, finding that there were issues of fact as to whether the herbicide product “could/did reach” the community water systems’ water supplies during the policy periods and whether it “could/did contribute to the detections” reported by the community water systems in connection with the settlement, and denied the insurers’ summary judgment motion.
On April 27, 2017, Josh Blosveren moderated a panel presentation titled “Policy Limit Demands or Time Limit Demands: Preparing and Responding Timely” at the 3rd annual TIPS Section Conference, held in Chicago, Illinois. The presentation addressed the strategies and pitfalls to be considered when making and responding to policy limit and time limit demands.
On March 3, 2017, Josh Blosveren gave a presentation titled “Whistling Past the Graveyard: Obtaining Insurance Coverage for Whistleblower Complaints and Retaliation Claims” at the 29th annual CLE Seminar of the Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee of the ABA’s Litigation Section, held in Tucson, Arizona. The presentation addressed coverage issues arising under different types of policies that may be implicated by whistleblower claims brought under various federal and state statutes.
Partner Josh Blosveren presented on a webinar panel entitled “D&O Liability Insurance: Hot Buttons Every Firm Needs to Know” on September 12, 2016, hosted by The Knowledge Group. He presented on new and trending coverage issues relating to D&O coverage for cyber liability and whistleblower claims, and on the much litigated “Professional Services Exclusion” in D&O policies.
Hoguet Newman Regal & Kenney, LLP is pleased to announce that nine of the firm’s attorneys were selected for 2016 New York Metro Super Lawyers® lists. Partners Laura B. Hoguet, Dorothea W. Regal, John J. Kenney, and Richard M. Reice have been named as Super Lawyers in the 2016 New York Metro Super Lawyers® Magazine. Ms. Hoguet and Mr. Kenney have been recognized in the area of Business Litigation. Ms. Regal has been recognized in the area of Insurance Coverage. Mr. Reice has been recognized in the area of Employment & Labor. These attorneys are among an elite group of New York attorneys to receive this honor, which is awarded to no more than 5 percent of lawyers in the State.
In addition, partners Joshua Blosveren, Andrew N. Bourne, Damian R. Cavaleri and Helene R. Hechtkopf, and counsel Marc Aaron Melzer, were named to the 2016 New York Metro Rising Stars list by Super Lawyers® Magazine. Mr. Blosveren and Mr. Bourne have been recognized in the area of Insurance Coverage. Mr. Cavaleri has been recognized in the area of Business Litigation. Ms. Hechtkopf has been recognized in the area of General Litigation. Mr. Melzer has been recognized in the area of Intellectual Property Litigation. “Rising Stars” recognizes top up-and-coming attorneys who are 40 years old or younger, or who have been practicing 10 or fewer years, and is awarded to no more than 2.5 percent of lawyers in the State.
Super Lawyers, a Thomson Reuters business, is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The annual selections are made using a patented multiphase process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, an independent research evaluation of candidates and peer reviews by practice area. The result is a credible, comprehensive and diverse listing of exceptional attorneys.
As set forth in a Decision and Order dated January 14, 2016, we defeated a motion for summary judgment filed by our client’s former insurance broker. Our client has alleged that the broker failed to properly advise him regarding his need for workers’ compensation coverage. Justice Joseph Santorelli of the New York Supreme Court found that precluding summary judgment were issues of fact regarding the nature of the relationship and communications between the parties.
As set forth in a Decision and Order dated March 16, 2016, we convinced the Second Department to affirm the 2014 denial by the trial court of a motion to dismiss filed by our client’s former insurance broker. Our client has alleged that the broker failed to properly advise him regarding his need for workers’ compensation coverage. The Second Department panel unanimously agreed with the trial court that the complaint “sufficiently alleged the existence of a special relationship between [the parties] so as to give rise to a duty to advise.”
As set forth in a September 2, 2015 court decision, we defeated summary judgment motions filed by 30 of our client’s insurance companies that had claimed that pollution exclusions in their policies barred all coverage for our client’s claims. The insurance claims are for defense and settlement costs in excess of $100 million incurred by our client in class action product liability litigation (which was settled without any finding of liability), brought by community water systems alleging that our client’s herbicide product applied to neighboring cropland contaminated their water. The winning argument for our client was that, as a threshold matter, the pollution exclusions cannot apply unless the insurers prove that the substance is a “pollutant” (within the meaning of the exclusions). The judge agreed, found that the insurers had not established that our client’s herbicide product was a “pollutant” within the meaning of the exclusions, and denied the insurers’ summary judgment motions.
In an August 27, 2015 decision, Justice Eileen Bransten of the Commercial Division of the New York County Supreme Court dismissed all claims brought by a Canadian company against the firm’s client and other individuals and entities accused of conspiring to obtain a controlling interest in a Russian oil company. The firm’s client was the former President and Chief Executive Officer of a co-defendant company. In a comprehensive opinion addressing claims that have been litigated in the federal and New York courts for over a decade, Justice Bransten upheld a favorable decision of a Siberian court determining similar claims and also found that New York lacks personal jurisdiction over our client.
A Law360 article discussing Justice Bransten’s decision can be accessed here.
Josh Blosveren was quoted in an April 9, 2014 Law360 article and an April 10, 2014 New York Commercial Litigation Insider article, both of which addressed a new rule and guidelines concerning nonparty e-discovery proposed by the Commercial Division Advisory Council, of which Josh is a member. His subcommittee, the Use of Technology in Commercial Division Cases Subcommittee, drafted the proposed rule and guidelines.
The proposed Rule 34 to Section 202.70 (Rules of the Commercial Division of the Supreme Court) of the Uniform Civil Rules For The Supreme Court And The County Court states that parties and nonparties should adhere to the Guidelines for Discovery of Electronically Stored Information (“ESI”) from Nonparties. The Guidelines are intended to improve the efficiency of nonparty e-discovery and reduce the potential costs and burdens imposed on parties and nonparties by encouraging, among other things, the early identification and discussion of issues relating to nonparty e-discovery