Erin Raschke exclusively represents insurers and their agents and focuses on complex insurance coverage, counseling and litigation, including advising and defending insurers from allegations of “bad faith.” She routinely represents surplus lines and admitted, both foreign and domestic, insurance carriers in state and federal court, including at the appellate level, in third-party coverage matters involving:
-
- Commercial auto
- Commercial general liability
- Errors and omissions
- Premises liability
- Professional liability
- Specialty lines
Experience
- Obtained favorable settlement after filing declaratory judgment action and leveraging coverage defenses for general liability insurer regarding catastrophic injury claim against insured watersports company.
- Along with several Phelps colleagues, provided coverage advice to international liability insurers regarding U.S. coverage issues arising out of thousands of toxic tort suits filed against Fortune 500 insured.
- Prepared briefing and presented oral argument to Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal, and obtained affirmance of foreclosure, while assisting Phelps’ business group in representing county in appeal from foreclosure order.
- Represented general liability insurer in declaratory judgment action regarding coverage. After obtaining summary judgment confirming lack of coverage and award for reimbursement of incurred defense fees and costs in insurer’s favor at the trial court level, presented oral argument to Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals and obtained affirmance of attorney’s fee and cost award.
- Along with two other partners at Phelps, represented insurers and their agents in class action litigation in which plaintiffs alleged the defendants acted in concert to sell plaintiffs a worthless insurance product in violation of the Florida Insurance Code. After prevailing at the trial court level on a motion to dismiss, obtained affirmance from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals on grounds that all but one of the statutes plaintiffs relied upon did not provide a private right of action, and the remaining alleged violation failed on the merits.