Call For Consultation

Insurance Coverage and Litigation

Insurance Coverage Litigation in Boston, MA

We counsel insurance companies on first-party property coverage issues, collaborate with clients’ Special Investigation Units, coordinate outside experts and consultants in scene inspections, take examinations under oath, and represent insurance companies in appraisal and reference proceedings. We also serve as referees and umpires on reference and appraisal panels. We have extensive knowledge and experience in defending bad faith insurance claims.

We regularly prepare detailed coverage opinions. We prosecute and defend declaratory judgment actions; and defend first- and third-party claims under consumer protection insurance statutes and regulations, including class action and multi-district litigation. Because of our extensive knowledge of insurance statutory and regulatory frameworks, our clients also trust us with advice on policy-drafting and endorsements. We are at the forefront of cutting-edge litigation in the property insurance field.

Our appraisal and reference attorneys efficiently resolve disputes involving measure of damages regarding real property, contents and business interruption losses. We advise clients regarding their exposure, meet their goals, and deliver favorable outcomes.

Our tenacious advocacy tempered with common sense and practical advice achieve the most successfully resolutions for our clients.

Our unsurpassed expertise covers many different types of insurance policies. We consistently achieve strong results for our clients. We counsel and litigate on coverage matters involving:

  • Personal and Commercial Auto
  • Boiler and Mechanical Breakdown
  • Builder’s Risk, Businessowners
  • Condominium/Cooperatives
  • Commercial Property
  • Homeowners
  • Inland and Ocean Marine
  • Jewelers
  • Manuscript Forms
  • Mobile Homes
  • Property and Casualty
  • Renters
  • Reinsurance
  • Restaurant
  • Surety and Bond


  • Coverage dispute under businessowners policy involving collapse of a metal storage building caused by landslide. Policyholder claimed $2 million in damages. The value as to the damage to the building and business income loss claim was submitted to reference, with an award of $450,000.
  • Coverage dispute under businessowners policy for damage to business personal property located at a location that is not listed on the declarations page.
  • Declaratory judgment action for determination of coverage of a $10 million loss where policy was scheduled to be cancelled ”as soon as possible,” but did not cancel until after the loss and policyholder obtained another replacement policy. Court held both policies covered the loss.
  • Coverage under a “Comprehensive Jewelers Block Policy” for jewelry stolen from a vehicle. While the policyholder was in a convenient store, his vehicle containing his jewelry stock was robbed. The court granted insurer motion for summary judgment and denied policyholder’s motion because it was apparent that the policyholder was neither “in” nor “on” the vehicle and thus under the policy definitions, the vehicle was not attended.
  • Coverage dispute involving homeowner’s mold damage claim where some mold existed before pipe burst, while other mold resulted from water damage.
  • Coverage dispute involving a $10,000.00 sub-limitation of coverage for lost key coverage where the master key to 15 commercial buildings was stolen. Policyholder submitted a claim for $85,000.00. Case was submitted to reference where panel awarded the sublimit of $10,000.00.
  • Coverage dispute under a builder’s risk brought by contractor for a $2 million water damage loss. The Court allowed the insurer’s motion for summary judgment, holding that the policy terminated by the terms of the termination clause in the policy.
  • Coverage dispute under builder’s risk policy of a $32 million insurance claim involving the Boston Big Dig Project (a public highway and tunnel construction project). Panel of arbitrators determined notice of claim was untimely and therefore rendered a zero award.
  • Coverage dispute under master condominium association policy for $450,000 loss to unit owner’s unit. Court held that there is no coverage for unit owner as she is not named insured. Coverage dispute on 25 Boston Big Dig claims under builder’s risk policies with exposures of $50 million involving tunnel collapse, flooding of work sites, slurry wall/retaining wall collapse, freeze pipe foundation breakage, and underground steam line meltdown.
  • Coverage dispute over $800,000 fire loss by landlord who applied for general liability and loss of business income coverages, but not for property coverage. The Court held that the property loss was not covered under the policy.
  • Defended class action over $25 million wrongful retention of premium under insurance policy.
  • Coverage dispute involving a claim of $600,000 for water remediation caused by sprinkler head malfunction. Case submitted to reference where reference panel awarded only $250,000 to policyholder.
  • Coverage for sewer back up loss which had a sublimit of $10,000, but policy form setting forth the sublimit was not provided to the policyholder through a scrivener’s error. Case was tried to a jury for reformation of the insurance contract to include the form.

Please contact our insurance coverage lawyers to zealously represent you in your Massachusetts coverage disputes. Call us at (617) 777-4748 or email us at

Contact us

Please contact us for your Massachusetts insurance coverage
disputes and nationwide subrogation claims.

The Law Offices of Marie Cheung-Truslow provides the skillful
representation you need.

Call us at 617-777-4748 or contact us online to set up an initial consultation.