David B. Hamm

David Hamm has extensive experience in Appellate Law and Insurance Coverage. During his tenure with Herzfeld + Rubin (after a two-year clerkship at the New York State Court of Appeals), David has worked on more than 450 appeals in every appellate court in the state of New York. He has many times been requested by clients to write Amicus Curiae briefs for the United States Supreme Court, the New York Court of Appeals and other appellate courts. Together with other members of Herzfeld + Rubin’s appellate team, David has often spearheaded the presentation of cutting-edge legal analysis resulting in appellate rulings not only favorable to our clients in the cases at bar, but which created precedent favorable to our clients on a broader basis. His innovative approach to appellate practice resulted in such Court of Appeals decisions as in Sung-Hwan Co. Ltd. v. Rite Aid Corp., 7  N.Y.3d 78 (2006), in which the Court reversed an Appellate Division and found a jurisdictional basis to permit enforcement of a Korean Court’s Judgment in New York, and Frank v. Meadowlakes Dev. Corp., 6 N.Y.3d 687 (2006), in which the Court overturned two intermediate appellate court determinations in interpreting Article 16 of New York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules in a manner most favorable to our client.

David’s legal acumen is put to broader use than preparation and review of appellate briefs alone. His advice and legal analysis is much sought-after by colleagues and clients. He has often advised clients not to pursue an appeal, or to resolve an action on appeal, where his analysis suggested that to be in the client’s best interest. He interacts directly with the firm’s litigation attorneys on matters involving legal analysis and research to assure the best possible result in the trial court or, if a favorable result cannot be obtained there, to preserve critical issues for appellate review.

In his insurance coverage practice, David has, over the years, been entrusted by clients with the defense of hundreds of millions of dollars in claims under liability policies, including policies alleged to cover mass tort claims such as those arising from asbestos, breast implants, heart valves, and lead. His pace-setting arguments have led to such ground-breaking decisions as Jefferson Ins. Co. v. Travelers Indem. Co., 92 N.Y.2d 553; North Star Reinsurance Corp. v. Continental Ins. Co., 82 N.Y.2d 281; In re Consolidated Mut. Ins. Co., 60 N.Y.2d 1; and Lac D’Amiante du Quebec, Ltee (ASARCO) v. Superintendent of Ins. (In re Midland Ins. Co.), 269 A.D.2d 50. His expertise in insurance matters encompasses such related areas as insurance liquidation, insurance security funds, interpretation of workers’ compensation laws, application of New York’s “no-fault” statute’s “serious injury” criterion, subrogation and “antisubrogation,” additional insured controversies and insurance ramifications of contractual indemnification provisions.