John Rodewald is a partner whose national practice focuses on insurance coverage cases concerning allegedly defective products, construction defects, property damage and environmental claims, and bodily injury claims involving asbestos-related diseases, silicosis, and toxic exposure. He has also handled complex coverage matters involving insureds in bankruptcy, bad faith litigation, and reinsurance matters. He has represented insurers in coverage litigation involving some of the largest corporations in the world, including Amoco Corporation, American Cyanamid, Bridgestone/Firestone, Dow Chemical, ELF Atochem, General Dynamics, Glidden, Halliburton, Marathon Oil, Texaco, United Technologies, and a host of others. Beyond litigated matters, John regularly provides legal advice and counsel to insurers regarding coverage issues presented by a wide variety of underlying claims.
In addition to his insurance coverage experience representing the insurance industry in disputes with policyholders, John has significant experience in reinsurance arbitrations and litigation. John has represented both reinsurers and cedents in proceedings in the United States and Bermuda in various confidential arbitrations that have been tried to conclusion or resolved prior to final Hearing. John's experience on the "underlying direct side" of insurance coverage litigation makes him particularly well-suited to advocate positions for clients in the reinsurance context.
John has successfully argued matters in both state and federal courts located throughout Illinois, as well as in Wisconsin, Florida, Indiana, Ohio, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, New Jersey, and Colorado, and he has participated in appeals before the Illinois Appellate Court, the Illinois, New Jersey, Arizona, and Alabama Supreme Courts, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth, Sixth, and Seventh Circuits.
John frequently participates in insurance industry educational functions and regularly conducts seminars advising existing clients on significant insurance coverage and reinsurance issues and developments in the law. John also participates annually as an evaluating Judge at moot court competitions held for law students in the Chicago area.
John has been named an Illinois Super Lawyer in the area of insurance coverage, and has been selected to the prestigious "Leading Lawyers" list published by the Law Bulletin Publishing Company.
"Novel Issues and Novel Strategies" presented to the Defense Research Institute's Insurance Coverage for Environmental Claims Seminar (Boston, MA October 1993) and to the American Bar Association's Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee Meeting (Tucson, AZ March 1994)
"Asbestos Litigation and Bankruptcy -- $20 Billion and Counting" presented at Georgia State University's HKJ Scholars Fellowship/Munich Re Group Program (Atlanta, GA Spring 2004 and Spring 2005)
"Last Call: Strategies for the Non-Settling Insurer After Your Friends Leave The Party" presented at the American Bar Association's Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee Meeting (Tucson, AZ March 2010) and to the Chicago Bar Association Insurance Coverage Seminar (Chicago, IL May 2010)
Mt. Hawley Ins. Co. v. Casson Duncan Construction, Inc., 2016 COA 164 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016) Colorado Court of Appeals orders recalcitrant insurer to pay its proper share of costs taxed against the insured via supplementary payments clause, where insurer defended the insured but claimed it did not owe coverage under its policies.
BITCO General Ins. Corp. v. The Hinrichs Group, Inc., et al., 13-MR-164 (Ill Cir. Ct. 2016) Insurer obtained summary judgment, a finding of no duty to defend or indemnify, and recoupment of all defense costs incurred in defending, based upon property damage exclusions j, l, and m applied to underlying claims involving construction defects.
Bituminous Cas. Corp. v. Iles, et al., 2013 IL App (5th) 120485 Illinois Appellate Court applies "Each Occurrence Limit" instead of the "General Aggregate Limit" to bodily injury and property damage claims caused by an oil well explosion.
WASCO v. Bituminous, 2013 IL App (1st ) 120983 Illinois Appellate Court confirms no insurance coverage available to WASCO and insurer had no duty to defend; insurance policies were not "assigned" to WASCO, and any purported assignment breached the "no assignment" provisions in the Bituminous policies.
National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa. v. Mead Johnson & Co., LLC, No. 3:11-cv-161 (S.D. Ind. Dec. 19, 2012), aff'd, ___ F.3d___, 2013 WL 5788652 (7th Cir. 2013) Obtained summary judgment in favor of insurer, negating over $13 million in potential exposure. The district court and Seventh Circuit held that allegations of false advertising and disparagement, as set forth in ten underlying class action lawsuits, were not "of and concerning" the underlying claimants, and therefore did not implicate "personal and advertising injury" coverage under the applicable liability policy.
Mead Johnson & Co. LLC. v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2012 WL 159930 (S.D. Ind. January 18, 2012) Insurer granted summary judgment on lack of federal question subject matter jurisdiction.
Illinois Valley Paving v. Old Republic Ins. Co., 2011 WL 504210 (E.D. Mo. 2011) Partial summary judgment granted in favor of umbrella insurer, restricting indemnity limit of coverage potentially available to alleged additional insured to the indemnity limit of additional insured coverage set forth in primary policy.
Lenex Steel v. Rockhill Ins. Co., No. 10 CH 20681 (Ill. Cir. Ct. 2011) Court enters summary judgment in favor of excess insurer, ruling that under Illinois law all primary coverage must be exhausted before any excess coverage is called upon to pay. Court also sanctioned opposing counsel and his clients for pursuing a frivolous lawsuit, and awarded the excess carrier recovery of a portion of its attorneys’ fees and costs.
Bituminous Cas. Corp. v. Fifth Third Bancorp, No. 06-MR1543 (Ill. Cir. Ct. 2009) Upon substituting for prior counsel and filing motion to reconsider, trial court reverses prior ruling against insurer and enters summary judgment in favor of insurer, finding additional insured coverage did not apply to underlying claim.
Bituminous Cas. Corp. v. Classic Coal Corp., No. 06-MR-73 (Ill. Cir. Ct. 2008) Summary judgment entered in favor of primary insurer for numerous underlying bodily injury claims involving allegedly defective respiratory protection respirators used in coal mining activities.
NL Industries v. American Re-Insurance Co., No. CC-06-04523 (Dallas Co., Tex. 2008) Insurers prevail in forum dispute over where to litigate insurance coverage issues arising out of lead paint bodily injury and public nuisance claims.
Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. American Re-Insurance Co., No. 8:06CV16 (D. Neb. 2008) Court enters summary judgment in favor of reinsurer and against ceding company and broker who failed to properly procure reinsurance or obtain special acceptance from the reinsurer to provide reinsurance for long-haul trucking risk.
Bituminous Cas. Corp. v. Aaron Ferer and Sons Co., No. 4:06CV3128 (D. Neb. 2007) Summary judgment entered in favor of insurer for underlying lead contamination claims based upon "sudden and accidental" pollution exclusion.
In Re Federal Mogul Global, Inc., 2007 WL 4180545 (Bankr. D. Del 2007) Bankruptcy Court addresses legal standing of insurers to object to Section 524(g) "pre-packaged" asbestos bodily injury bankruptcy plan of reorganization and resulting Asbestos BI Trust.
Vulcan Materials v. Alabama Ins. Guar. Assoc., 985 So.2d 376 (Ala. 2007) Alabama Supreme Court affirms insurers' motion to dismiss policyholder's Alabama coverage litigation on grounds of forum non conveniens.
Bituminous Cas. Corp. v. Washington Metro. Transit Auth., MJG 05CV910 (D. Md. 2006) Summary judgment entered in favor of insurer because scope of coverage provided by additional insured endorsement did not apply to underlying bodily injury claim.
Glidden Co. v. Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co., 861 N.E.2d 109 (Ohio 2006) Judgment entered in favor of insurers and affirmed by the Ohio Supreme Court; insurance policies did not transfer to alleged successor company by "operation of law."
Muntean v. Stellar Group, No. 96 L 189 (Ill. Cir. Ct. 2000) Court grants insurer's petition to intervene in underlying lawsuit for the purpose of submitting special interrogatories to the jury to assist in the determination of insurance coverage issues.
Maricopa County v. Allianz, No. CV 95042493 (Ariz. Super. Ct. 1998) Summary judgment granted in favor of insurer based upon "sudden and accidental" pollution exclusion.
O'Rourke v. Oney, No. 1-96-2657 (Ill. App. 1st Dist. 1998) Affirming trial court's dismissal of legal malpractice action.
International EPDM Rubber Roofing Systems, Inc. v. Admiral Ins. Co., No 96-3337 (6th Cir. 1997), reprinted in 11 Mealey's Litig. Rep. Ins. 10 (June 3, 1997) Insurance coverage not available for hundreds of defective roofing claims asserted against the manufacturer of an allegedly defective roofing system, and rejecting bad faith claims and claims against insurers asserted pursuant to an "assignment" and "covenant not to execute."
Bituminous Cas. Corp. v. St. Clair Lime Co., 69 F.3d 547 (10th Cir. 1995) Absolute pollution exclusion barred coverage for claims arising out of workplace exposure to toxic substances.
Forty-Eight Insulations, Inc. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 162 B.R. 143 (Bank. N.D. Ill. 1993) Court addresses defense of judicial estoppel raised in context of asbestos bankruptcy and insurance coverage litigation.
Atwood v. Warner Electric Brake & Clutch Co., 605 N.E.2d 1082 (Ill. App. 1992) Affirming order barring toxic tort plaintiffs from submitting evidence of personal injury claims not supported by medical certifications required in trial court's discovery order.